3 ms·

I think morality is one of the strongest wedge issues against this sort of pseudoscience which says: if it appears X, it is X. ie., there are very few people w

I think morality is one of the strongest wedge issues against this sort of pseudoscience which says: if it appears X, it is X. ie., there are very few people who would make that claim about morality. There are many who might think, "well if it appears to be playing chess, it is!" (i disagree). But almost none who'd say, "well if it appears to defence murder, it must really think its a good idea!". The latter is clearly absurd, and we've lots of reasons to suppose the system even lacks basic capacities to form any view, preference, intention (etc.) about murder. Once you realise this, I think the house-of-cards falls; because it sets up the fatal gap between: what the output appears to be caused by vs. what it really is caused by. As soon as you ask, "but what really caused the machine to generate that text?" the answer exposes the trick.

PaulHoule 4y ago
Two things about morality. It’s connected with truth and logic because a correct moral decision involved getting the facts straight. In our household (which runs a riding academy) we reject the Abrahamic position and say that morality is a function of mammals (and probably birds.). That’s based on observations of animals having strong emotional reactions to violations of social expectations. The first time I got thrown off a horse, for instance, the horse was much more shook up than I was and acted contrite and extra-sweet afterwards. There was one time I teased my cat by taking the side of the neighbors’ cat (with body language) in a territory dispute and my cat seemed highly offended at me which persisted for a few hours.