You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

cunning_moralist comments on Reasonable Requirements of any Moral Theory - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: TheSurvivalMachine 10 October 2016 08:48PM

Comments (8)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cunning_moralist 12 October 2016 12:11:58PM 1 point [-]

Two different actions don’t produce exactly the same utility, but even if they did it wouldn’t be any problem. To say that you may chose any one of two actions when it doesn’t matter which one you chose since they have the same value, isn’t to give “no guidance”. Consequentialists want to maximize the intrinsic value, and both these actions do just that.

Of course hedonistic utilitarianism doesn’t require completeness, which, by the way, isn’t one of its tenets either. But since it is complete, which of course is better than being incomplete, it’s normal for hedonistic utilitarianists to hold the metaethical view that a proper moral theory should answer all of the question: “Which actions ought to be performed?” What could be so good with answering it incompletely?