= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
conchis comments on Utilons vs. Hedons - 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 (112)
Hedons won't be a subset of utilons if we happen not to value all hedons. One might not value hedons that arise out of false beliefs, for example. (From memory, I think Lawrence Sumner is a proponent of a view something like this.)
NB: Even if hedons were simply a subset of utilons, I don't quite see how that would mean that this post "doesn't really make sense".
Ah, I see! Thank you, that helps.
RE:NB Reading hedons as a subset of utilons, phrases like "maximize our hedons at the expense of our utilons" didn't make sense to me.
The x that maximizes f(x) might not maximize f(x)+g(x).