I really need to get around to writing more anti-moral-uncertainty posts :P
What it functionally is here is aggregating different peoples’ preferences via linear combination. And this is fine! But it’s not totally unobjectionable—some humans may in fact object to it (not just to the particular weights, which are of course subjective). So moral uncertainty isn’t a solution to meta-moral disagreement, it’s a framework you can use only after you’ve already resolved it to your own satisfaction and decided that you want to aggregate linearly.
I really need to get around to writing more anti-moral-uncertainty posts :P
What it functionally is here is aggregating different peoples’ preferences via linear combination. And this is fine! But it’s not totally unobjectionable—some humans may in fact object to it (not just to the particular weights, which are of course subjective). So moral uncertainty isn’t a solution to meta-moral disagreement, it’s a framework you can use only after you’ve already resolved it to your own satisfaction and decided that you want to aggregate linearly.