= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Manfred comments on Open thread, Nov. 30 - Dec. 06, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (104)
I know the punchline - CEV. To me, it seemed to belabour points that felt obvious to me, while skipping over, or treating as obvious, points that are really confusing.
Regardless of whether CEV is the correct ethical system, it seems to me that CEV or CV is a reasonably good schelling point, so that could be a good argument to accept it on pragmatic grounds.
Hmm, that's not what I think is the punchline :P I think it's something like "your morality is an idealized version of the computation you use to make moral decisions."
Really? That seems almost tautological to me, and about as helpful as 'do what is right'.
Well, perhaps the controversy is that that's it. That it's okay that there's no external morality and no universally compelling moral arguments, and that we can and should act morally in what turns out to be a fairly ordinary way, even though what we mean by "should" and "morally" depends on ourselves.
It all adds up to normality, and don't worry about it.
See, I can sum up an entire sequence in one sentence!
This also doesn't seem like the most original idea, in fact I think this "you create your own values" is the central idea of existentialism.