Well the fact that it appears to be impossible to get two LessWrongers to agree on whether a given moral theory is coherent and non-arbitrary is not encouraging in that regard.
As written, this implies that every LWer holds a different moral theory, which seems obviously false. A better phrasing might be, “There does not appear to be a majority position on morality on LW.”
Also, talking about only LWers seems a bit narrow. I would have gone for “moral philosophers in general”, actually.
Well the fact that it appears to be impossible to get two LessWrongers to agree on whether a given moral theory is coherent and non-arbitrary is not encouraging in that regard.
As written, this implies that every LWer holds a different moral theory, which seems obviously false. A better phrasing might be, “There does not appear to be a majority position on morality on LW.”
Also, talking about only LWers seems a bit narrow. I would have gone for “moral philosophers in general”, actually.
Because lesswrongians have philosophical superpowers, so if they can’t do it, noone can?
But lesswrongian are rather lacking philosophical ordinarypowers, from where I’m standing.