4 ms·

Perhaps you have studied morality simulations in the past, whereas I have not. It was written simply. (In my opinion the occasional wordiness was a stylistic c

by argc 12y ago

Perhaps you have studied morality simulations in the past, whereas I have not. It was written simply. (In my opinion the occasional wordiness was a stylistic choice to mimic casual conversation rather than a strictly rigorous academic paper.. fitting for a blog post.) I found it a though-provoking read, and I have no qualms if his ideas were not "novel". Digesting old ideas and writing about them is not a crime. If anything, it is beneficial to those who did not read the original work (like me). As you said... to each his own.

cscurmudgeon 12y ago
That is the problem here. For anyone who has studied ethics and morality, this is hair-pullingly bad. It is not easy to communicate these ideas. An analogy: Would you trust a physicist who does not communicate often, or a creationist who writes popular science essays?
- lifeformed 12y ago
  Well, I never knew this field of study existed before, and now I'm interested in it. I'm not going to blindly trust everything in this article, but now I have some starting points on things to look up. The article mostly discussed the interesting, big picture ideas. That aroused my interest far more than if I just started on some technical math article.
  - tripzilch 12y ago
    You didn't know about the field of Ethics? It's (IMVHO) one of the most important fields in Philosophy, and (again, IMHO) with the most practical applications in real life. Before you rush off to study it (which I highly recommend, for anyone who has the chance / ability), it's not so much about learning better systems of ethics or learning about the many types of systems of ethics that have been thought up in the past, but it's about learning the arguments why they are/were wrong and how they break down in situations, and to carry these arguments. That's how a lot of fields in Philosophy work, and why it seems such a dry study of "arguing for argument's sake". The point is, by doing this, practice, you learn a lot of useful things along the way and sharpen your mind. I do agree with the other poster that the featured article (while interesting to read), does seem to lack a bit in how it connects with actual philosophy of ethics.
    - lifeformed 12y ago
      I didn't know about morality simulations.
- MiaoYu_Goh 12y ago
  Are there any resources you would recommend to the uninitiated? I am willing to put in the effort needed to understand even very technical texts. Thank you.

by argc 12y ago

cscurmudgeon 12y ago

That is the problem here. For anyone who has studied ethics and morality, this is hair-pullingly bad. It is not easy to communicate these ideas. An analogy: Would you trust a physicist who does not communicate often, or a creationist who writes popular science essays?

lifeformed 12y ago
Well, I never knew this field of study existed before, and now I'm interested in it. I'm not going to blindly trust everything in this article, but now I have some starting points on things to look up. The article mostly discussed the interesting, big picture ideas. That aroused my interest far more than if I just started on some technical math article.
- tripzilch 12y ago
  You didn't know about the field of Ethics? It's (IMVHO) one of the most important fields in Philosophy, and (again, IMHO) with the most practical applications in real life. Before you rush off to study it (which I highly recommend, for anyone who has the chance / ability), it's not so much about learning better systems of ethics or learning about the many types of systems of ethics that have been thought up in the past, but it's about learning the arguments why they are/were wrong and how they break down in situations, and to carry these arguments. That's how a lot of fields in Philosophy work, and why it seems such a dry study of "arguing for argument's sake". The point is, by doing this, practice, you learn a lot of useful things along the way and sharpen your mind. I do agree with the other poster that the featured article (while interesting to read), does seem to lack a bit in how it connects with actual philosophy of ethics.
  - lifeformed 12y ago
    I didn't know about morality simulations.
MiaoYu_Goh 12y ago
Are there any resources you would recommend to the uninitiated? I am willing to put in the effort needed to understand even very technical texts. Thank you.