Normal_Anomaly comments on The Nature of Self - Less Wrong

3 Post author: XiXiDu 05 April 2011 10:52AM

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

Comments (22)

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

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 05 April 2011 12:09:13PM 1 point [-]

Especially since its a question of values. "Is it worthwhile for parts x, y, and z to go on existing with the rest gone?" Can be mostly answered by asking yourself if you'd be interested in the prospect.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 05 April 2011 12:21:21PM 2 points [-]

It can't be reliably so answered, but it's often the best tool we have, and the thing to do when dissatisfied with quality of the best available option is not to discard it.

There are ways of improving the intuitions though, patching particular problems in them, and some even appear in this post. Continuity of experience is one such confused notion, which gives a good argument against immediate intuition in the relevant situations.

Comment author: XiXiDu 05 April 2011 12:29:47PM -1 points [-]

"Is it worthwhile for parts x, y, and z to go on existing with the rest gone?"

I am trying to figure out what it is that defines us, what it means to survive. That Sarah Palin and you both drink coffee or that some being with your name will be maximizing paperclips isn't it. Self-preservation seems to be an important part of rationality, or what is it that instrumental rationality is for? And if you can't recognize yourself then what about epistemic rationality? Of course, there is only the universe that is unfolding and no self, but that could be said about values as well.