= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on The Urgent Meta-Ethics of Friendly Artificial Intelligence - 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 (249)
OK. The question I started out with, way at the top of the chain, was precisely about why having a referent for "right" was important, so I will drop that question and everything that descends from it.
As for your correction, I actually don't understand the distinction you're drawing, but in any case I agree with you that it might turn out that human volition lacks a coherent core of any significance.
To me, "what we collectively want done" means somehow aggregating (for example, through voting or bargaining) our current preferences. It lacks the elements of extrapolation and coherence that are central to CEV.
Gotcha... that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.
What is the source of criteria such as voting or bargaining that you suggest? Why polling everyone and not polling every prime-indexed citizen instead? It's always your judgment about what is the right thing to do.