= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MichaelBishop comments on If it looks like utility maximizer and quacks like utility maximizer... - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (24)
One of the distinctions that was not clear enough on that the thread, were the different types of utility functions. For example, I find it useful to talk about:
the function I feel ethically obliged to maximize, a.k.a. my philosophy.
the function(s) my behavior actually appears to maximize (approximately) at various levels of analysis.
the function I would maximize if I was more instrumentally rational, and/or less concerned about other people's utility.
This is a very important point. I don't see how we can think sensibly about human utility without distinguishing these.
Another question that occurs to me, if (2) differs from (1) and (3), when do we call it akrasia and when do we call it self-deception?
Ben calls those "implicit" and "explicit" goals here:
http://cosmistmanifesto.blogspot.com/2009/01/goals-explicit-and-implicit.html
Not great terminology - can we do better?
Another big one is: the goal(s) we want others to believe we have. Often "save the whales" - or some other piece of selfless signalling.