I’ve never met a person who didn’t have one. They’re problems because we have strong, different intuitions.
Didn’t have one what?
And where intuitions are strong and varying, we can’t use them to decide between ethical systems.
Who didn’t have a strong intution.
The problem isn’t lack of intuitions, it’s conflict between them. Agree this makes them useless, but the effects are different—construct a general system from a mostly unrelated set of intuitions vs invalidate some intuitions.
Hmm. There’s plenty of conflict between abortion is right/wrong,. and very little between murder is right/wrong.
But plenty of conflict on what is/isn’t murder.
Current theme: default
Less Wrong (text)
Less Wrong (link)
Arrow keys: Next/previous image
Escape or click: Hide zoomed image
Space bar: Reset image size & position
Scroll to zoom in/out
(When zoomed in, drag to pan; double-click to close)
Keys shown in yellow (e.g., ]) are accesskeys, and require a browser-specific modifier key (or keys).
]
Keys shown in grey (e.g., ?) do not require any modifier keys.
?
Esc
h
f
a
m
v
c
r
q
t
u
o
,
.
/
s
n
e
;
Enter
[
\
k
i
l
=
-
0
′
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
→
↓
←
↑
Space
x
z
`
g
I’ve never met a person who didn’t have one. They’re problems because we have strong, different intuitions.
Didn’t have one what?
And where intuitions are strong and varying, we can’t use them to decide between ethical systems.
Who didn’t have a strong intution.
The problem isn’t lack of intuitions, it’s conflict between them. Agree this makes them useless, but the effects are different—construct a general system from a mostly unrelated set of intuitions vs invalidate some intuitions.
Hmm. There’s plenty of conflict between abortion is right/wrong,. and very little between murder is right/wrong.
But plenty of conflict on what is/isn’t murder.