= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Johnicholas comments on Compartmentalization in epistemic and instrumental rationality - 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 (121)
This doesn't require any amendment to the original statement. Once you decide to cope by closing your eyes, your future sense experience options are limited - same with suicide. So neither will often be rationally chosen (except perhaps in a scary movie screening).
You're right, no amendments are necessary; I was answering a subtle implication that I heard in the sentence, and which Anna Salamon probably didn't intend to put there, and it's possible that my "hearing" in this matter is faulty.
However, your comment makes me think I haven't been sufficiently clear: A "quantum" suicide strategy would be combining a lottery ticket with a device that kills you if you do not win the lottery (it doesn't really have anything to do with quantum mechanics).
If we all we cared about was anticipated sense experience, this combination might seem to be a good idea. However, it is (to my common sense, at least) a bad idea; which is an argument that we care about something more than just anticipated sense experience.
It's a good point; thanks. I had indeed missed that when I wrote the sentence.