Socrathustra

Socrathustra t1_ivcmaks wrote

> On what grounds are you establishing that preferences are representative of morality? Why, on the grounds that our preferences are often moral!

Completely off-base and made-up. Please don't put words in my mouth.

I believe our preferences are part of the basis of morality for a variety of reasons which are beyond the scope of a discussion of the original post. I'm not going to get roped into a discussion of irrelevant minutiae. My suggestion was that if preferences are part of the basis of morality, the process of uncovering preferences is essential to morality. This is undoubtedly a true syllogism.

2

Socrathustra t1_ivcapvt wrote

When I say "science's attempts to be philosophy" I don't mean science per se but rather people like Shermer or NDT who think they can plow ahead with science solving everything. It's a common viewpoint in STEM even if it's not scientific.

5

Socrathustra t1_ivc19ou wrote

How is this circular or at all like Shermer? I don't believe it can establish what is moral on its own, just that it can be a useful process if you otherwise establish that preferences are part of morality.

5

Socrathustra t1_ivb8je5 wrote

I hate listening to interviews (as opposed to reading) and generally find science's attempts to be philosophy laughable, however I'm going to touch on this part which I presume is somewhat accurate in depicting the interview:

>"If you want to know if something is wrong, ask the people". - This just shows what their preference is. It does not entail anything beyond their preference.

Preference utilitarianism is a thing. Fwiw my intuition is that right and wrong are ultimately rooted in preferences, even if preference utilitarianism has issues. My point, though, is that identifying preferences is a helpful moral endeavor.

8