Moral luck

I was talking about free will.

edited 20th Feb '11 9:48:25 PM by deathjavu

If plovers made strategic decisons about where, when and why to pretend to brood, rather than executing a simple behavior upon seeing a predator, then flying away once he gets too close based on, I don't know, susceptibility to this nuerochemical on that chemical pathway caused by the protein produced by gene XYZ on chromosome 4, then I'd consider what they had to be free will.

Your already judging, already seeing what strategy to use based on the strategies that you've used or seen other people use before. You are not just executing instincts. There are probably some animals that effectively learn new strategies and adapt them situation ally too. It's petty clear that, while we function lawfully as anything in else in the universe, we make choices in every meaningful sense.

edited 20th Feb '11 10:43:18 PM by Roman

You know, I don't disagree with anything you said. I just don't want to call it free will : - ). Also, does Deep Blue have 'free will' then? It executes some pretty complex strategies.

I was talking about free will.

I know. Not all ethical systems are based on assigning fault that must be repaid. Your assertion that society «needs» to believe in free will is false.

not just executing instincts

If free will means not «just» executing instincts, humans aren't the only animals to have it by a long shot.

edited 20th Feb '11 11:21:39 PM by Tzetze

^^I'm pretty sure deep blue just uses a search tree to find the best move according to some algorithim or other. I think I have heard of A.I.s that can learn from opponents, in which case even a simple gameplaying AI could be said to have a sort of shallow free will. This is where I'd want Norn's input, though, as I don't know very much about that sort of thing at all.

^Probably, especially in the case of some primate political strategies that have been reported.

Yes, Deep Blue just uses a minmax algorithm with pruning, and there are systems that learn, like artificial neural networks (mechanism should be obvious).

Circumstantial and constitutive moral luck are the ones that bother me the most.

With circumstantial, the person might not have done something blameworthy if only they hadn't been in the wrong place, with the wrong person, etc. What that seems to imply to me is that if someone forced someone else into a position where it is way more difficult than usual not to do harm, the former was able to take another person's potential for morality away from them against their will. Kind of disturbing to me, as a person who wants to do good, if that's a valid interpretation.

Constitutive moral luck is when a person was shaped by their environment or their mental condition. What bugs me about that is how it can be taken to mean that people can be born with a moral handicap. If they're born into an environment that promotes selfishness, and it's a difficult environment to get out of, the struggle will be greater to resist the influence. If their genes give them a mental disadvantage that makes it easier to abuse other people, did their genes also give them a moral disadvantage?

A message that could be taken from both is that it is not just a personal but a moral imperative to improve ourselves upon what we were born with and to learn to spot and strengthen ourselves against circumstances in which we could be manipulated into immorality, because doing so can indirectly prevent us from doing wrong.

I'm hoping that I misinterpreted most of the above.

Ah, sorry, not being specific enough. I meant <<modern society>>, which I assume we're all in since we're having this conversation on the internet.

edited 20th Feb '11 11:37:49 PM by deathjavu

Deep Blue is basically Trance from Andromeda.

@deathjavu Why does 'modern society' need an ethics fundamentally based on punishment? That doesn't sound very believable to me. Most people don't really think about it that much, and people who think otherwise aren't that different. Note I'm not challenging the use of punishment in general.

Anyway, sorry about the derail. : - ( Only realized that after the fact. Originally I made an on-topic comment, but I felt like I had to respond to other people who commented about it, and then respond again...

edited 21st Feb '11 11:53:53 PM by LoveHappiness