RE: Defining Right and Wrong

From: Ben Goertzel (
Date: Sat Nov 23 2002 - 18:39:39 MST

MRA wrote:
> I am beginning to think Type IV godhood is not needed to ground Right
> and Wrong in objective reality. If our Friendly AI is going to be a
> Bayesian reasoner, then ve merely has to select a theory defining
> Right and Wrong, and test how closely the theory usefully describes
> reality. There is no reason why we cannot do the same right now.

Michael, as I see it, ethical/moral values cannot be tested according to
"how usefully they describe reality."

They are prescriptive rather than descriptive.

Of course, some ethical/moral systems could be logically inconsistent --
that is one way of narrowing down the set of all possible ethical/moral
systems ... iff one believes that ethical/moral systems *should* be
logically consistent. Most human ethical/moral systems don't seem to me to
be very logically consistent...

-- Ben G

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT