= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kaj_Sotala comments on Applying utility functions to humans considered harmful - 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 (114)
I'm wondering how a model can be "false". It seems like simply "bad" would be more appropriate.
Perhaps if the model gets you less accurate results than some naive model, or guessing.
I've been thinking a lot lately of treating ethical theories as models... I might have to write a paper on this, including some unpacking of "model". Perhaps I'll start with some top-level posts.
Any relation to my thoughts of ethical theories as models?
http://lesswrong.com/lw/18l/ethics_as_a_black_box_function/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/18l/ethics_as_a_black_box_function/14ha
Sure.
The three-tier way of looking at it is interesting, but I'll definitely be approaching it from the perspective of someone taking a theoretical approach to the study of ethics. The end result, hopefully, will be something written for such people.