I suspect that your post probably isn’t going to be very legible to the majority folks on Less Wrong, since you’re assuming familiarity with meta-modernism. To be honest, I suspect this post would have been more persuasive if you had avoided mentioning it, since the majority of folks here are likely skeptical of it and it hardly seems to be essential for making what seems to be the core point of your post[1]. Sometimes less is more. Things cut out can always explored in the future, when you have the time to explain them in a way that will be legible to your audience (though it’s often valuable to gesture towards the directions you wish to develop in the future).
I see as the core point that your post is arguing for as the following:
If moral realism is true[2], then this suggests that incorporating it within our attempt at alignment may be easier than avoiding making any assumptions about morality, since understanding morality then becomes about trying to see reality more clearly.
I think this is quite an interesting and reasonable argument and I’d like to see you sketch out in more detail how you think we might be able to leverage it.
I suspect that your post probably isn’t going to be very legible to the majority folks on Less Wrong, since you’re assuming familiarity with meta-modernism. To be honest, I suspect this post would have been more persuasive if you had avoided mentioning it, since the majority of folks here are likely skeptical of it and it hardly seems to be essential for making what seems to be the core point of your post[1]. Sometimes less is more. Things cut out can always explored in the future, when you have the time to explain them in a way that will be legible to your audience (though it’s often valuable to gesture towards the directions you wish to develop in the future).
I see as the core point that your post is arguing for as the following:
If moral realism is true[2], then this suggests that incorporating it within our attempt at alignment may be easier than avoiding making any assumptions about morality, since understanding morality then becomes about trying to see reality more clearly.
I think this is quite an interesting and reasonable argument and I’d like to see you sketch out in more detail how you think we might be able to leverage it.
As far as I can tell, but I could be wrong.
Which it certainly may not be and indeed there are some quite strong arguments against.