RichardChappell comments on Akrasia, hyperbolic discounting, and picoeconomics - Less Wrong

38 Post author: ciphergoth 29 March 2009 06:26PM

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

Comments (83)

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

Comment author: RichardChappell 30 March 2009 11:45:20PM 2 points [-]

Is there a better word for what he's talking about?

Inter-temporal conflict?

(Part of the problem with misusing language is that it makes it unclear exactly what one has in mind. I assume Ainslie has a broader target than mere imprudence: foreseeable moral failures may provide similar reasons for precommitment, regret, etc. So perhaps he really does mean general akrasia, despite the misleading definition. But does he also take his topic to include 'murder pills' and ordinary cases of [foreseeable] changes to our ultimate values? Or does he restrict himself solely to cases of intertemporal "conflict" involving akrasia -- i.e. whereby both 'selves' share the same ultimate values, and it's simply a matter of helping them "follow through" on these?)

Comment author: ciphergoth 31 March 2009 07:29:40AM 1 point [-]

His topic is specifically those changes of mind that we can anticipate because of hyperbolic discounting.

Comment author: RichardChappell 01 April 2009 03:29:58AM 3 points [-]

Okay, that sounds like 'imprudence', then.