“Why would anybody think that there is a single perfect morality, and if everybody could only see it then we’d all live in peace and harmony?”
Because they have a specific argument which leads them to believe that?
Sure, but have you ever seen such an argument that wasn’t obviously fallacious? I have not seen one yet. It’s been utterly obvious every time.
Thomas, you are running in to the same problem Eliezer is: you can’t have a convincing argument about what is fair, versus what is not fair, if you don’t explicitly define “fair” in the first place. It’s more than a little surprising that this isn’t very obvious.
I gave a simple obvious definition. You might disagree with it, but how is it unclear?
“Why would anybody think that there is a single perfect morality, and if everybody could only see it then we’d all live in peace and harmony?”
Because they have a specific argument which leads them to believe that?
Sure, but have you ever seen such an argument that wasn’t obviously fallacious? I have not seen one yet. It’s been utterly obvious every time.
Thomas, you are running in to the same problem Eliezer is: you can’t have a convincing argument about what is fair, versus what is not fair, if you don’t explicitly define “fair” in the first place. It’s more than a little surprising that this isn’t very obvious.
I gave a simple obvious definition. You might disagree with it, but how is it unclear?