steven0461 comments on The Threat of Cryonics - Less Wrong

36 Post author: lsparrish 03 August 2010 07:57PM

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

Comments (212)

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

Comment author: steven0461 05 August 2010 08:17:45PM *  1 point [-]

Whether or not it's a given, it's an assumption behind the particular argument I was responding to.

I disagree with the linked post but it would take some thinking/writing/comments-reading time to explain why. And surely if "shut up and divide" is a reason for egoism it's also a reason for myopia?

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 05 August 2010 08:28:26PM 1 point [-]

The argument is that there is significant uncertainty, not that we certainly (or even probably) are that selfish. Values can in principle say anything about preferred shape of spacetime, so selfishness at present doesn't automatically imply not caring about the future.

Comment author: steven0461 05 August 2010 08:35:13PM *  0 points [-]

If due to scope insensitivity we care about living for a billion years only a million times as much as about eating an extra cookie, then if you apply Wei Dai's "shut up and divide" principle, we should prefer the extra cookie to 500 years of life. (ETA: while this is extreme myopia, it may not be enough myopia to make cryo a bad idea.)