Jordan comments on A Much Better Life? - Less Wrong

61 Post author: Psychohistorian 03 February 2010 08:01PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (173)

Comments (173)

Sort By: Best

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

Comment author: Jordan 04 February 2010 11:11:55PM 9 points [-]

There are no assurances.

You're hanging off a cliff, on the verge of falling to your death. A stranger shows his face over the edge and offers you his hand. Is he strong enough to lift you? Will you fall before you reach his hand? Is he some sort of sadist that is going to push you once you're safe, just to see your look of surprise as you fall?

The probabilities are different with cryonics, but the spirit of the calculation is the same. A non-zero chance of life, or a sure chance of death.

Comment author: shiftedShapes comment score below threshold [+] (7 children)

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 05 February 2010 02:54:47AM 5 points [-]

http://lesswrong.com/lw/z0/the_pascals_wager_fallacy_fallacy/

Comment author: shiftedShapes 05 February 2010 04:22:02PM 1 point [-]

only a fallacy if your assignment of probabilities here:

"And cryonics, of course, is the default extrapolation from known neuroscience: if memories are stored the way we now think, and cryonics organizations are not disturbed by any particular catastrophe, and technology goes on advancing toward the physical limits, then it is possible to revive a cryonics patient (and yes you are the same person). There are negative possibilities (woken up in dystopia and not allowed to die) but they are exotic, not having equal probability weight to counterbalance the positive possibilities."

is accurate. I really don't have the expertise to debate this with you. I hope that you are right!

I think the logistical issues discussed above will be the wrench in the works, unfortunately.

Comment author: mattnewport 05 February 2010 07:30:33PM 0 points [-]

Logistical issues are my main concern over cryonics as well. I don't really doubt that in principle the technology could one day exist to revive a frozen person, my doubts are much more about the likelihood of cryonic storage getting me there despite mundane risks like corporate bankruptcy, political upheaval, natural disasters, fires, floods, fraud, etc., etc.

Comment author: Morendil 05 February 2010 07:04:47AM 1 point [-]

How does it work?

Comment author: shiftedShapes comment score below threshold [+] (0 children)

Comment author: Jordan 05 February 2010 01:32:04AM * 1 point [-]

For small enough probabilities the spirit of the calculation does change. That's true. You then have to factor in the utility of the money spent.

ETA: that factor exists even with non-small probabilities, it just tends to be swamped by the other terms.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 05 February 2010 01:28:27AM 1 point [-]

We have discussed Pascal's Wager in depth here. Read the archives.

Jordan comments on A Much Better Life? - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (173)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (173)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login