= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
InquilineKea comments on Rationality and being child-free - 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 (61)
Yes, that's true. The thing is this: it is rational for each of us to be childless, even though childlessness is not collectively rational for us all. It's sort of like a prisoner's dilemma with many people in it.
Also known as a "Tragedy of the Commons".
You can also think of it as evolution selecting against atheism.
Eliezer discusses a situation like this here.
I find this statement highly questionable standalone. Rational given what aims?
This, however, explains people who get incredibly upset at the notion of others not wanting children and brand them "selfish".
Very important. Any memeplex that has aims that happen to produce kids will have a edge. It just so happens few if any secular memplexes have made this possible.
But this is odd especially since values are arbitrary, is there really no value one can pursue that is best served (among other things) in having children (and perhaps attempt to imprint the same values on them)?
Its the same kind of upset a different kind of people have when they don't see someone ,who has already heard all the arguments for it, recycling.
Another way a memeplex can succeed is by being very good at converting others. Note that such a memeplex if left unchecked could cause humans, or at least whatever culture it spreads in to evolve to extinction. As such leaders of other memeplexes may take extreme measures to suppress it.
Agreed. However very virulent memeplexes are unlikley to be attacked, they will quickly gain sympathy in nearly any organization.