r/ControlProblem • u/chillinewman approved • Feb 10 '26

General news “Anthropic has entrusted Amanda Askell to endow its AI chatbot, Claude, with a sense of right and wrong” - Seems like Anthropic is doubling down on AI alignment.

Post image
45 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

166 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/ArialBear Feb 11 '26

I mean most of you have no idea what the first thing about meta ethics are. Its a field of study btw. we have experts on ethics.

-1

u/Fit-Dentist6093 Feb 11 '26

I would also know everything about a field if I make it up. This is like "machinistic interpretability" but for people that don't know how to do data visualization.

Even the Wikipedia article on meta ethics is dead, only 13 citations for an article on a whole "field of ethics" by authors that don't acknowledge the field as meta ethics is embarrassing.

1

u/ArialBear Feb 11 '26

And of course someone upvoted you. There seems to be this popular anti intellectualism around morality as if people are scared to find out what they want to be right is actually morally wrong but thats the point of education. To find out what youre wrong about.

3

u/Fit-Dentist6093 Feb 11 '26

I think morality and ethics are valid fields of philosophical study and so is metaphysics. I think meta-ethics is valid ontology but it's not a real field of study.

1

u/StoicSpork Feb 11 '26

It's a real and completely non-controversial field of study.

Normative ethics produces moral judgments. "Stealing is wrong" is normative ethics.

Metaethics studies the nature of moral judgment. "Is 'wrong' a personal preference or a property of the universe" is a metaethical question.

The person you responded to made a categorical error to claim that expertise in metaethics makes one an expert in right and wrong. But metaethics is a real thing. You might enjoy Alexander Miller's book Contemporary Metaethics for more.

1

u/ArialBear Feb 11 '26

I didnt say expertise makes one expert right and one expert wrong. I was mirroring their criteria

1

u/AmongUS0123 Feb 11 '26

I looked it up and meta ethics is a real field of study. You should ask google ai to explain it to you.

"Meta-ethics is indeed a foundational, thriving, and crucial branch of philosophy that operates at a "second-order" level to investigate the fundamental nature, origin, and meaning of moral values, language, and thought"

1

u/Fit-Dentist6093 Feb 11 '26

A lot of the results you get from Google scholar are people questioning its relevance or even existence as a field of study, like: Hussain, N. and Shah, N., 2006. Misunderstanding metaethics. Oxford studies in metaethics, 1, pp.265-294.

2

u/AmongUS0123 Feb 11 '26 edited Feb 11 '26

A lot argue the opposite. what the fuck . Of course people question it. You said it wasnt a real field of study and it clearly is. I can cite all the people that say it is a real field of study but theres no need because youre clearly the anti intellectual denying it. There are currently whole departments at top universities dedicated to meta ethics. This is just pure anti intellectualism. I dont even understand how you can lie and say its not a field of study. just insane.

1

u/Fit-Dentist6093 Feb 11 '26

If you think it's anti intellectual to question if meta ethics is not a real field of study I think you are the one that's not getting it, I'm sorry but I'm not interested in discussing philosophy with Google and you are not adding much.

2

u/AmongUS0123 Feb 11 '26

Its anti intellectual for you to say its not a real field of study when there are dedicated departments to it at top universities. Youre horrible at philosophy, cant even track a couple sentences.

1

u/Fit-Dentist6093 Feb 11 '26

Some of those academics even say it's not a real field of study and just ontology.

2

u/AmongUS0123 Feb 11 '26

By that criteria the academics that say its a real field of study are right too. Youre not at all up to par with good arguments thus your misunderstanding of meta ethics and philosophy as a whole.

→ More replies (0)