AnnaSalamon comments on Self-Improvement or Shiny Distraction: Why Less Wrong is anti-Instrumental Rationality - Less Wrong

105 Post author: patrissimo 14 September 2010 04:17PM

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

Comments (251)

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

Comment author: Wei_Dai 15 September 2010 07:06:13PM 7 points [-]

Absent conscious intervention, we don’t optimize for pleasure -- we optimize for a combination of pleasure and non-effort.

This is a bit tangential to your point, but why should we consciously optimize for pleasure, instead of of a combination of pleasure and non-effort? If you think pleasure is likely to be part of our True Preferences (however defined, e.g., our consciously held preferences after sufficient reflection), why not non-effort also?

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 15 September 2010 07:22:41PM *  3 points [-]

Good question.

Still, if I found out now that my pleasure would be raised above my usual baseline from now on, I'd feel happy. And if I found out my effort would be reduced (without side-effects), I would not. It could be that the temporal discount rates work differently for pleasure vs. non-effort.