amcknight comments on Human errors, human values - Less Wrong

32 Post author: PhilGoetz 09 April 2011 02:50AM

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

Comments (135)

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

Comment author: Johnicholas 09 April 2011 11:36:08AM *  12 points [-]

The way that we can resolve values vs. errors is by endorsing symmetries.

For example, Rawl's "veil of ignorance" enjoins us to design a society, on the assumption that we might be anyone in that society - we might have any degree of talent or disability, any taste or preferences, and so on. This is permutation symmetry.

If we have two situations that we believe are exactly analogous (for example, the trolley car problem and a similar problem with a subway car), then we call any systematic difference in our human intuitions an error, and we choose one of the two intuitions to endorse as applying to both cases. (I don't know that people systematically differ in their survey responses to questions about trolley car problems vs. subway car problems, but I wouldn't be surprised.)

In forming a notion of values and errors, we are choosing a priority order among various symmetries and various human intuitions. Utilitarians prioritize the analogy between flipping the switch and pushing the fat man over the intuition that we should not push the fat man.

Comment author: amcknight 18 May 2012 08:25:28PM 1 point [-]

I think this is the way that a lot of philosophy is done. Identifying symmetries in order to attach more to your intuition pumps. (By the way, great response! It's the only one that directly addresses the main issue raised in the article, as of May 2012.)