torekp comments on Morality and relativistic vertigo - Less Wrong

40 Post author: Academian 12 October 2010 02:00AM

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

Comments (78)

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

Comment author: torekp 18 October 2010 01:47:52AM 1 point [-]

I have undergone changes in values that I would describe in this way. Namely, I had something I considered a terminal value that I stopped considering terminal upon realizing something factual about it.

Changing terminal values in response to learning is not only possible, but downright normal. We pursue one goal or another and find the life thus lived to be good or bad in our experience. We learn more about the goal-state or goal object, and it deepens or loses its attraction.

This needn't mean that "the true terminal value" is pleasure or other positive emotion, even though happiness does play a role in such learning. Most people reject wire-heading: clearly pleasure is not their overarching "true terminal value."

Comment author: fortyeridania 18 October 2010 04:11:53AM 0 points [-]

This needn't mean that "the true terminal value" is pleasure or other positive emotion

True, it wouldn't mean that pleasure was the actual terminal value, and the fact that many people reject wire-heading is evidence that pleasure is indeed not a terminal value for those people.

However, what role could "happiness" or feelings of well-being play, if not as true terminal values, if it's in response to those feelings that people change (what they thought were) their terminal values?