[extropy-chat] In defense of moral standards (Was: In defense of moral relativism)

Samantha Atkins sjatkins at mac.com
Sat May 7 05:23:40 UTC 2005

Hmm.  My impression was that he said something somewhat similar about  
"objective morality" not " objective reality".   The question seems  
to me about whether "is" implies "ought", whether objective reality  
gives rise to or supports objective morality.   I don't think you  
were simply being terse in only referring to it as "objective reality".


On May 4, 2005, at 2:03 PM, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:

> John-C-Wright at sff.net wrote:
>> Giu1io Prisco is convinced we should have no convictions. His  
>> standard is that
>> we should have no standards.  He makes two arguments: first, he  
>> reasons that moral reasoning is unnecessary;
>> second, that adherence to moral standards, being a person of  
>> character and
>> conviction, always leads to mass-murder and atrocity. In other  
>> words, argues
>> that moral relativism is good, (or, at least, acceptable) and that  
>> moral
>> standards are bad.
> It was a tad worse than that.  I believe Giulio also said that  
> believing in an external, objective reality leads to mass-murder  
> and atrocity.
> But as that is only Giulio's mere personal opinion, bearing no  
> relation to (smirk smirk) any actual "reality" (if indeed such a  
> concept is even coherent) we may safely ignore it.
> (Though that refutation does not actually follow.  Giulio did not  
> assert that reality was not objective; he merely said that  
> entertaining the notion leads to homicide.  This assertion has no  
> evidential bearing on whether reality is objective.)
> -- 
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list