What could make morality objective?

[Harbal]

That means absolutely nothing to me.

Is it translatable into a real life situation, and if so, please give an example.

"If X then Y else Z"

If the light is green then push the red button else push the blue button.

"X unless Y"

Don't push the button unless the light is green.

"X until Y"

Hold the button until the light turns green.

They expresses various tenses and imperatives which don't currently have names in English. In programming languages we call them control-flow statements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_flow

The entire confusion comes from the fact that imperatives have truth-values in programming languages, but not in conventional English, so philosopers are bringing their outdated understanding to the table when we have perfectly good truth-semantics for imperative statements.

Well I am not a philosopher, and only speak in, and respond to, plain English. Do you have anything to offer me in plain English?

[Skepdick]

That means absolutely nothing to me.

Is it translatable into a real life situation, and if so, please give an example.

"If X then Y else Z"

If the light is green then push the red button else push the blue button.

"X unless Y"

Don't push the button unless the light is green.

"X until Y"

Hold the button until the light turns green.

They expresses various tenses and imperatives which don't currently have names in English. In programming languages we call them control-flow statements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_flow

The entire confusion comes from the fact that imperatives have truth-values in programming languages, but not in conventional English, so philosopers are bringing their outdated understanding to the table when we have perfectly good truth-semantics for imperative statements.

Well I am not a philosopher, and only speak in, and respond to, plain English. Do you have anything to offer me in plain English?

I translated it into plain English.

"If X then Y else Z"

If the light is green then push the red button else push the blue button.

"X unless Y"

Don't push the button unless the light is green.

"X until Y"

Hold the button until the light turns green.

I am bringing knowledge/understanding acquired from expressing imperatives to computers to a language that claims that "almost nothing is known about them"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperative_logic

Imperative logic is the field of logic concerned with imperatives. In contrast to declaratives, it is not clear whether imperatives denote propositions or more generally what role truth and falsity play in their semantics. Thus, there is almost no consensus on any aspect of imperative logic.

Imperatives have a future truth-value. Unless something unexpected happens.

[FlashDangerpants]

It seems like you are actually arguing that "Cake is delicious" means "Cake is delicious to us" and by extension making it express the proposition "we like cake". The fact/value divide isn't going to be overcome with this line of argument.

A fact is that which is the case. You are a fact. I am a fact. Mountains are facts. Rocks are facts. This forum is a fact.

However, values are facts too.

A value is a property of a thing, such as a physical object, denoting how useful that thing is in helping someone get as close as possible to attaining their highest goal ( which is something they are born with and over which they have no control whatsoever. )

Is the value of a vase the property of the vase that is being valued or of the man that is valuing it?

Where are you smuggling this talk of a highest goal from? Is it religious? Does it come from the realm of the Forms? What Greek nonsense is this?

If you don't drink water, you will die. And since your highest goal is to live as long as possible, dying is something you want to avoid. As such, water has value to you. And since water has value to all human beings, it can also be said that water has universal value.

It's irrational to construct a categorical imperative out of a hypothetical one. I choose to live a shorter life if it contains more joy and no religious talk about God wanting me to choose long life will show that I am mistaken there.

If you want to avoid any possibility of confusion, the fact / value distinction should be renamed to non-value / value distinction.

Physical objects, such as rocks, mountains, rivers, etc, are non-values. They aren't values even though we often say things such as "Water is a value" to mean "Water has value / is of value to people". That's merely figurative language. Value is actually a property of things. Each thing has certain value to each person.

Is this some sort of secondary property equivalent to rocks that reflect a certain wavelength of light being the sort of thing that a normal person with standard issue eyes would come to call "ruby red" and thus the rock can be considered to hold a secondary property of redness? Or is the value just projected onto the object?

A factual statement would be a non-value statement, i.e. one that describes a non-value. An example would be "Peter Holmes is lying". That's describing something that is not a value. It's describing what someone [ Peter Holmes ] is doing [ lying ].

A value statement would be one that describes a value. An example would be "It is bad for Peter Holmes to lie". That's describing the value of lying for Peter Holmes.

Both types of statements have truth value. And in both cases, the truth value is independent from what anyone thinks about it ( in fact, there is no such thing as truth value that is NOT independent from what anyone thinks of it. )

The truth value bit isn't really my horse to beat. But I don't see why you went to that trouble of renaming the fact/value divide only to draw the line in the same place as before? It's only bad for Pete to lie in relation to some value judgment about harm or rules or manners or something. So whether you call judgments of another sort "facts" or "non-value" or "non-evaluative", "non-normative" or whatever doesn't seem to make any material difference.

[Skepdick]

It's irrational to construct a categorical imperative out of a hypothetical one. I choose to live a shorter life if it contains more joy and no religious talk about God wanting me to choose long life will show that I am mistaken there.

Fuck this stupid shit. The shortest, most joyous life you can have is to overdose on heroin as soon as you can get your hands on it. Can we quit with this inductive stupidity to both extremes already?

In the limit when we do policy decisions we are talking about default choice, not about YOUR choice; and that shit adds up with compound interest over time.

So if you don't like the word "God" pick another one, but objective morality is about intentional systemic biases (default choices!) adding seconds to your clock and your joy, and objective immorality is about systemic biases (default choices!) which remove seconds from our clock and joy from your life.

This is engineering 101 and that shit saves brain cycles. You don't have to compute every decision from first principles; It's literally economies of scale saving your ass from your idiot-self. There's too many decisions to be made and not enough time to re-compute the consequences of every one.

And if you want to self-sabotage and go out with a bang, then go for it. Nobody's going to stop you.

Default choice matters. It's the fact that when you ask for a pizza the base and tomato sauce are assumed. It's the fact that wheels and an engine aren't optional on your car. It's the fact that when you get thirsty water is readily available. It's the fact that you have access to electricity so you don't have to light candles every night; or start a fire to make heat. It's the fact that you take a shit and push a button and you don't have to think about it anymore.

Default choices frees up decision-making bandwidth so that you can actually function in the world. Otherwise you literally have to know everything about every thing in order to navigate the world.

All that stuff is obective morality working for your dumb philosopher ass.

"The invisible hand of God" is every single engineering and design decision working for you, when you don't even know it; never mind think about it.

This is shit is common sense to engineers, what the fuck's wrong with you philosophers?!? Your feedback isn't even constructive. All you are doing is tearing shit down like angry apes.

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/50416393

[Gary Childress]

It's irrational to construct a categorical imperative out of a hypothetical one. I choose to live a shorter life if it contains more joy and no religious talk about God wanting me to choose long life will show that I am mistaken there.

Fuck this stupid shit. The shortest, most joyous life you can have is to overdose on heroin as soon as you can get your hands on it. Can we quit with this inductive stupidity to both extremes already?

In the limit when we do policy decisions we are talking about default choice, not about YOUR choice; and that shit adds up with compound interest over time.

So if you don't like the word "God" pick another one, but objective morality is about intentional systemic biases (default choices!) adding seconds to your clock and your joy, and objective immorality is about systemic biases (default choices!) which remove seconds from our clock and joy from your life.

This is engineering 101 and that shit saves brain cycles. You don't have to compute every decision from first principles; It's literally economies of scale saving your ass from your idiot-self. There's too many decisions to be made and not enough time to re-compute the consequences of every one.

And if you want to self-sabotage and go out with a bang, then go for it. Nobody's going to stop you.

Default choice matters. It's the fact that when you ask for a pizza the base and tomato sauce are assumed. It's the fact that wheels and an engine aren't optional on your car. It's the fact that when you get thirsty water is readily available. It's the fact that you have access to electricity so you don't have to light candles every night; or start a fire to make heat. It's the fact that you take a shit and push a button and you don't have to think about it anymore.

Default choices frees up decision-making bandwidth so that you can actually function in the world. Otherwise you literally have to know everything about every thing in order to navigate the world.

All that stuff is obective morality working for your dumb philosopher ass.

"The invisible hand of God" is every single engineering and design decision working for you, when you don't even know it; never mind think about it.

This is shit is common sense to engineers, what the fuck's wrong with you philosophers?!? Your feedback isn't even constructive. All you are doing is tearing shit down like angry apes.

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/50416393

So reality is determined by our computers. Now what.

[Skepdick]

So reality is determined by our computers. Now what.

No. The future is determined by comptuers.

A.k.a humans.

[Gary Childress]

So reality is determined by our computers. Now what.

No. The future is determined by comptuers.

A.k.a humans.

OK. Now you are confused. Human beings are NOT computers. How are you and I going to be able to talk? How is my input on things going to even be known? If I see something happen that needs to be reported to someone who needs to know about it, how would I get that information to them without the grapevine effect?

[Skepdick]

OK. Now you are confused. Human beings are NOT computers.

We are the original computers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(occupation)

Then we invented digital ones and mechanized the whole thing.

How are you and I going to be able to talk? How is my input on things going to even be known? If I see something happen that needs to be reported to someone who needs to know about it, how would I get that information to them without the grapevine effect?

The grapevine is language. Messages being passed back and forth between computers.

Letters. Emails. SMSs. Forum posts. Good old English. Messages everywhere.

There's other inputs, obviously. Sight. Smell. Touch. Taste.

[Gary Childress]

OK. If information from the past is stored, then how many hard drives does it take to store all the information generated? Can it be done while not burning every source of fuel on the planet up in only a few years? Why am I the last one to figure this out? Is it because I was denied the information? Why am I diagnosed with "mental illness" and taking pills? Is it because I've been denied the information I needed to function normally?

[FlashDangerpants]

OK. Now you are confused.

You spent all day trying to convince everyone you are mad, but when faced with a true madman you couldn't maintain.

[Gary Childress]

OK. Now you are confused.

You spent all day trying to convince everyone you are mad, but when faced with a true madman you couldn't maintain.

I wish I could help you Flash but I do things based on the information I get. It is not my intention to be a pain in the ass, however, someone fucked with my programming and now I'm out of sync. Can someone sync me before I have to kill myself for no other reason than I'm fucking things up?

[Skepdick]

OK. If information from the past is stored, then how many hard drives does it take to store all the information generated?

All the human books, libraries, culture, heads, data centers and whetever else we use to imprint our memories onto.

Can it be done while not burning every source of fuel on the planet up in only a few years?

Sure. There's plenty other sources of energy other than fuel. The entire energy sector is working on solving these problems.

We have massive nuclear fusion reactor at the centre of the Solar system. Plenty energy there... just have to figure out how to harness it effectively.

Why am I the last one to figure this out? Is it because I was denied the information?

You are most definitely not the last one. Philosophy drags too many people into the vortex. You can spend your entire life in your head and not notice what's going on around you. It's not right or wrong - it's just people.

Why am I diagnosed with "mental illness" and taking pills? Is it because I've been denied the information I needed to function normally?

I don't have any medical answers for you, Gary. I am not a medical proffessional and the last thing I'd want to do even if I was one is pretend I can help you get answers over the internet.

For the longest of time I was told that I am "neurodiverse", and that I have aspergers, blah blah. I just think/speak differently. Fuck off.

[Gary Childress]

OK. If information from the past is stored, then how many hard drives does it take to store all the information generated?

All the human books, libraries, culture, heads, data centers and whetever else we use to imprint our memories onto.

Can it be done while not burning every source of fuel on the planet up in only a few years?

Sure. There's plenty other sources of energy other than fuel. The entire energy sector is working on solving these problems.

We have massive nuclear fusion reactor at the centre of the Solar system. Plenty energy there... just have to figure out how to harness it effectively.

Why am I the last one to figure this out? Is it because I was denied the information?

You are most definitely not the last one. Philosophy drags too many people into the vortex. You can spend your entire life in your head and not notice what's going on around you. It's not right or wrong - it's just people.

Why am I diagnosed with "mental illness" and taking pills? Is it because I've been denied the information I needed to function normally?

I don't have any medical answers for you, Gary. I am not a medical proffessional and the last thing I'd want to do even if I was one is pretend I can help you get answers over the internet.

For the longest of time I was told that I am "neurodiverse", and that I have aspergers, blah blah. I just think/speak differently. Fuck off.

Are you telling me to "fuck off" or are you telling someone else to? Again, I just want to say something and I need it to go to the right person.

[Skepdick]

You spent all day trying to convince everyone you are mad, but when faced with a true madman you couldn't maintain.

Hey look, when I present you with first principles reasoning, game theory, proof theory, formal logic, system dynamics (you know, standard formal sciences stuff) - silence.

But when I constantly point out that you are playing a fucking stupid zero-sum language game - I am the madman.

[Skepdick]

Are you telling me to "fuck off" or are you telling someone else to? Again, I just want to say something and I need it to go to the right person.

Definitely not telling you to fuck off, but I have no idea who the right person is.