It's only irrelevant because his assumption is held as false by lesswrongers. ASU is to deontology as Fun Theory is to consequentialism, or something along those lines. It would be very relevant if we agreed with deontology!
Why do we disagree? Are we wrong, or is he?
Is he wrong?
Why should I read the book of someone who is wrong on such an important matter when there are so many books I could read?
It's only irrelevant because his assumption is held as false by lesswrongers.
No it isn't. It is less relevant because it deals mostly with political theory (mind-killer territory and usually avoided on Less Wrong) while his other books cover epistemology, decision theory, and philosophy of science.
Why do we disagree? Are we wrong, or is he?
Firstly, ASU contains Nozick's least developed ethical thought. Secondly, like I said before,
......his ethical theory doesn't really fit neatly into the deontological/consequentialism dichotomy anyway. Arguably, h
Y'all know the rules: