Yeah, I definitely should. What I was trying to say was that most LWers think that morality is an aspect of minds, not an aspect of the outside world (no universal morality). I think I misunderstood the term, this time through wikipedia it seems that moral relativism rejects a common human morality. It appears I was using the word wrong.
Then you’re probably right about this being a standard position on LW, but you used wrong/misleading terminology. Rejection of universal morality might be a suitable description, though there are fine points this doesn’t capture, morality being “subjectively objective”, in the sense of everyone having their own “personally-objective” morality they can’t alter in any way (so that there is a possibility of getting it wrong and value in figuring out what it is).
(“Being an aspect of mind” also runs into problems, since there’s no clear dividing line that makes things other than your own mind absolutely useless in figuring out what (your) morality is.)
Yeah, I definitely should. What I was trying to say was that most LWers think that morality is an aspect of minds, not an aspect of the outside world (no universal morality). I think I misunderstood the term, this time through wikipedia it seems that moral relativism rejects a common human morality. It appears I was using the word wrong.
Then you’re probably right about this being a standard position on LW, but you used wrong/misleading terminology. Rejection of universal morality might be a suitable description, though there are fine points this doesn’t capture, morality being “subjectively objective”, in the sense of everyone having their own “personally-objective” morality they can’t alter in any way (so that there is a possibility of getting it wrong and value in figuring out what it is).
(“Being an aspect of mind” also runs into problems, since there’s no clear dividing line that makes things other than your own mind absolutely useless in figuring out what (your) morality is.)