= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on A Normative Rule for Decision-Changing Metrics - 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 (17)
I don't find the Repugnant Conclusion as Repugnant as some people do. I think it gets some of its Repugnance from ambiguity about what constitutes a life that's "barely worth living". It could mean (1) a life whose bearer finds it just barely better than death, or (2) a life that in absolute terms is just barely better than if it had never been. I think a life of type 1 is probably much worse than a life of type 2, and it's type-2 lives that the Repugnant Conclusion gives us an awful lot of.
Yes that's a viable solution, to just accept the Repugnant Conclusion. As I discussed in my first post I think it's very hard to compare any existence to non-existence, as it depends on whether you exist to make the consideration. At least when the person already exists, the way I would do it is to consider type 1 the measure of type 2. I.e. they are the same to me.