What could make morality objective?

Should you think about your duty, or about the consequences of your actions? Or should you concentrate on becoming a good person?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9097
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:17 pm A computer can make choices - a hammer can't.
Actually, a computer doesn't "make choices." Rather, it only appears to us that it does, because we anthropomorphize it, while it merely follows along with whatever programming was installed into it by an outside intelligence. And the introduction of something like, say, a random-number generator doesn't change that fact either...programming plus a random number doesn't amount to a "choice" either.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:22 pm Actually, a computer doesn't "make choices." Rather, it only appears to us that it does, because we anthropomorphize it, while it merely follows along with whatever programming was installed into it by an outside intelligence. And the introduction of something like, say, a random-number generator doesn't change that fact either...programming plus a random number doesn't amount to a "choice" either.
I can say the exact same thing about you. You don't make choices either - it only appears that you do.

Rather, you simply do whatever your God programmed you to do.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9097
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:24 pm I can say the exact same thing about you. You don't make choices either - it only appears that you do.

Rather, you simply do whatever your God programmed you to do.
Theological Determinists, like the Ultracalvinists, do, in fact say that. I think they're wrong, but that's what they say.

But again, the analogy between human cognition and mere computation by mechanical means just doesn't work. You are not a computer, and a computer is not you -- even if you manage to fool people, one way or the other.

That's the difference between the Turing test and reality. The Turning test only shows whether or not human beings can be fooled...it doesn't show that a computer is actually conscious.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:29 pm Theological Determinists, like the Ultracalvinists, do, in fact say that. I think they're wrong, but that's what they say.
What's your point? Non-determinists say it also.

Here is a non-determinist saying it: I'll tell you: I believe in free will. Why? Well, the neurons in my brain just fire in such a way that my mouth opens and I say I have free will. What choice do I have?
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:29 pm That's the difference between the Turing test and reality. The Turning test only shows whether or not human beings can be fooled...it doesn't show that a computer is actually conscious.
This has nothing to do with the Turing test.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9097
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:32 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:29 pm Theological Determinists, like the Ultracalvinists, do, in fact say that. I think they're wrong, but that's what they say.
What's your point? Non-determinists say it also.

Here is a non-determinist saying it:
Umm....Do you have a bit of trouble detecting irony? Not familiar with paradox?

Follow through the line of thought, instead of just reading his opener, and you'll see that the guy's making an argument for Determinism. He's really a Determinist.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:48 pm Umm....Do you have a bit of trouble detecting irony? Not familiar with paradox?

Follow through the line of thought, instead of just reading his opener, and you'll see that the guy's making an argument for Determinism. He's really a Determinist.
I am most familiar with paradox. Not so much with paradox-resolution.

If you could determine that you are a non-determinist does that make you a determinist or a non-determinist?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9097
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:54 pmIf you could determine that you are a non-determinist does that make you a determinist or a non-determinist?
You just shifted the meaning of "determine," from something like "preset," to something like "figure out." So the question isn't logical. It has a shifting middle term.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:56 pm You just shifted the meaning of "determine," from something like "preset," to something like "figure out." So the question isn't logical. It has a shifting middle term.
I am not doing any shifting - I am steady as a rock. It must be you.

How would you determine whether something was "preset" or not?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9097
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:57 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:56 pm You just shifted the meaning of "determine," from something like "preset," to something like "figure out." So the question isn't logical. It has a shifting middle term.
I am not doing any shifting - I am steady as a rock. It must be you.
*Sigh.* Okay. Not going anywhere again. I see.

Have a nice day.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 8:05 pm *Sigh.* Okay. Not going anywhere again. I see.
It went somewhere. You missed the question.

How would you determine (figure out, if you so will) whether something was "preset" or not?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Sculptor »

Skepdick wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:17 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 7:14 pm Y̶o̶u̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ I am simply wrong.
Y̶o̶u̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ I am clueless about what computers do.
Y̶o̶u̶ ̶I might as well say that a hammer understands.
There, fixed it for you.

A hammer is not a computer.
A computer can make choices - a hammer can't.
The ability to make a choice does not indicate understanding.
Computer makes choices based on algorithms, written by humans.
You might as well say a train understands where it is going when it (ahem!) "chooses" a different track.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 2:14 pm The ability to make a choice does not indicate understanding.
Do you understand what it means to understand?
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 2:14 pm Computer makes choices based on algorithms, written by humans.
You might as well say a train understands where it is going when it (ahem!) "chooses" a different track.
Aaaand... you supplied the evidence to the contrary.

There is a difference between deterministic and non-deterministic algorithms.

A train on train tracks is a deterministic algorithm.
A self-driving car is a non-deterministic algorithm.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Sculptor »

Skepdick wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 2:56 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 2:14 pm The ability to make a choice does not indicate understanding.
Do you understand what it means to understand?
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 2:14 pm Computer makes choices based on algorithms, written by humans.
You might as well say a train understands where it is going when it (ahem!) "chooses" a different track.
Aaaand... you supplied the evidence to the contrary.

There is a difference between deterministic and non-deterministic algorithms.

A train on train tracks is a deterministic algorithm.
A self-driving car is a non-deterministic algorithm.
This is just an abuse of language
"non-deterministic" is still wholly deterministic in the philosophical sense, otherwise you could never trust a self driving car. The only thing that is not determined is the INPUT. The program that drives a car has fully determined responses OUTPUT.

But this is not even relevant.
The car still understands nothing.
Skepdick
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Skepdick »

Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm This is just an abuse of language
Cry me a river. It's perfectly valid use of programming languages.

Check your cognitive dissonance.
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm "non-deterministic" is still wholly deterministic in the philosophical sense, otherwise you could never trust a self driving car.
The only thing that is not determined is the INPUT. The program that drives a car has fully determined responses OUTPUT.
So you don't even understand the difference between non-determinism and randomness.
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm But this is not even relevant.
The car still understands nothing.
Do you think you understand anything? If you claim that you do - prove it.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What could make morality objective?

Post by Sculptor »

Skepdick wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:12 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm This is just an abuse of language
Cry me a river. It's perfectly valid use of programming languages.

Check your cognitive dissonance.
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm "non-deterministic" is still wholly deterministic in the philosophical sense, otherwise you could never trust a self driving car.
The only thing that is not determined is the INPUT. The program that drives a car has fully determined responses OUTPUT.
So you don't even understand the difference between non-determinism and randomness.
Sculptor wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 5:01 pm But this is not even relevant.
The car still understands nothing.
Do you think you understand anything? If you claim that you do - prove it.
The burden of proof is with you. Prove that a computer can understand.
Post Reply