Alicorn comments on Welcome to Heaven - Less Wrong

23 Post author: denisbider 25 January 2010 11:22PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (242)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: byrnema 26 January 2010 05:09:21AM *  2 points [-]

You seem to believe that because desires are something that can only exist inside a mind, therefore desires can only be about the state of one's mind.

I don't believe this, but I was concerned I would be interpreted this way.

I can have a subjective desire that a cup be objectively filled. I fill it with water, and my desire is objectively satisfied.

The problem I'm describing is that filling the cup is a terminal value with no objective value. I'm not going to drink it, I'm not going to admire how beautiful it is, I just want it filled because that is my desire.

I think that's useless. Since all the "goodness" is in my subjective preference, I might as well desire that an imaginary cup be filled, or write a story in which an imaginary cup is filled. (You may have trouble relating to filling a cup for no reason being a terminal value, but it is a good example because terminal values are equally objectively useless.)

But let's consider the example of saving a person from drowning. I understand that the typical preference is to actually save a person from drowning. However, my point is that if I am forced to acknowledge that there is no objective value in saving the person from drowning, then I must admit that my preference to save a person from drowning-actually is no better than a preference to save a person from drowning-virtually. It happens that I have the former preference, but I'm afraid it is incoherent.

Comment author: Alicorn 26 January 2010 05:13:40AM *  3 points [-]

The preference to really save a drowning person rather than virtually is better for the person who is drowning.

Of course, best would be for no one to need to be saved from drowning; then you could indulge an interest in virtually saving drowning people for fun as much as you liked without leaving anyone to really drown.

Comment author: denisbider 26 January 2010 02:26:39PM 3 points [-]

Actually, most games involve virtually killing, rather than virtually saving. I think that says something...

Comment author: Ghatanathoah 14 June 2012 04:55:13AM 0 points [-]

In most of those games the people you are killing are endangering someone. There are some games where you play a bad guy, but in the majority you're some sort of protector.