I really dislike the phrase "human values". I think it's confusing because:

• It obscures a distinction between human preferences and normative values, i.e. what the author thinks is good in a moral sense
  • Insofar as the author thinks that fulfilling human preferences is good, they often leave this unjustified
• It's unclear who the "human" in "human values" is. Is it...
  • The person using the phrase "human values"
  • Any particular single individual
  • Most humans
  • Certain humans
  • Humans as they will be in the future, or after "reflection"
• It's often used with an unjustified implicit assumption, like:
  • Humans will eventually converge on deciding to value to same stuff, provided enough time/intelligence/information
  • What most/some humans value must be objectively good to pursue
    • Because they have intuitive access to moral truths, or
    • Because of an ethical framework that necessitates this like preference utilitarianism
  • Most humans already value the same stuff

Instead of "human values", people should either:

• Talk about someone's preferences
  • Their own preferences
  • The preferences most / some people share
  • The preferences they / some / most people would have after reflecting
  • A special type of subset of those preferences (e.g. preferences that stay [...]

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.