from which much of morality can be systematically derived
Not all of it, though, because you still need some “core” or “terminal” values that you use do decide what counts as a win. In fact, all the stuff that’s derived from game theory seems to be what we call instrumental values, and they’re in some sense the less important ones, the larger portion of the arguments about morality end up being about those “terminal” values, if they even exist.
You are talking about different things Dolores is talking about “why should I cooperate instead of cheating” kind of morality. You on the other hand are talking about meta-ethics, that is what is the meaning of right and wrong, what is value etc.
Indeed. Terminal values are also… pretty personal, in my book. Very similar across the whole of neurologically intact humanity, maybe, but if someone’s are different from yours, good bloody luck talking them out of them.
Not all of it, though, because you still need some “core” or “terminal” values that you use do decide what counts as a win. In fact, all the stuff that’s derived from game theory seems to be what we call instrumental values, and they’re in some sense the less important ones, the larger portion of the arguments about morality end up being about those “terminal” values, if they even exist.
You are talking about different things Dolores is talking about “why should I cooperate instead of cheating” kind of morality. You on the other hand are talking about meta-ethics, that is what is the meaning of right and wrong, what is value etc.
Indeed. Terminal values are also… pretty personal, in my book. Very similar across the whole of neurologically intact humanity, maybe, but if someone’s are different from yours, good bloody luck talking them out of them.