
Software for moral enhancement - kaj_sotala
http://kajsotala.fi/2016/09/software-for-moral-enhancement/
======
zeveb
The trouble I see is that we all have different versions of morality. I, for
example, believe that tobacco is a positive social good, cigarettes are a
social ill and anti-smoking campaigners are utterly despicable; that is the
precise opposite of what many people believe: my version of a morality-guiding
app would encourage folks to do things that others abhor (and their version
would encourage folks to do things I abhor) and discourage folks from doing
things they approve of (&c.).

~~~
imagist
This isn't necessarily a problem--open source apps could be made configurable
to aid people in controlling their behavior toward _almost any_ goal, with
focus on goals that fall into forms of morality. The most basic forms of this
are apps that just provide data--what decisions people make with that data are
up to them (although there is an underlying problem of how filtering and
presenting data shapes people's decisions). But in a larger sense, a
behavioral modification tool could be used equally by pro-smoking and anti-
smoking advocates.

It's a bit off-topic, but I'm curious about your pro-smoking stance. Could you
give your reasoning? I have some reasons of my own why I'm not _as_ anti-
smoking as most people, but I wouldn't go so far as to say tobacco is a social
good, and I'm a bit confused by you also saying cigarettes are a social ill.

~~~
zenogais
With all these competing, possibly contradictory moralities, how do you see
this reliably making the world a better place?

PS. Understandably, we might not all even agree on what a better world would
look like.

~~~
imagist
Personally, I think empowering individuals to control their own lives is an
inherent good, so within my personal definition of morality, it makes the
world a better place from the start.

However, I'm well aware of the tradeoffs--en masse, individuals will
collectively make some pretty stupid decisions (i.e. continuing the
destruction of the planet) that might make the world a worse place. We need
more than programs that allow personal choice to make the world better--we
need education, social change, better laws, funding, etc.

The fact is, there's nobody running the show who could coordinate all of this
to ensure that programs that enable personal choice are a net positive. We can
only do our part and hope that people in other areas of expertise do their
part.

------
ianai
I like this as a thought provoking piece. The examples seem less than stellar
though. It begs the interesting point of the moral value of the Internet.

