Alexei comments on On the unpopularity of cryonics: life sucks, but at least then you die - Less Wrong

72 Post author: gwern 29 July 2011 09:06PM

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

Comments (465)

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

Comment author: Alexei 29 July 2011 01:41:32PM 0 points [-]

Actually, when you put the argument for cryonics like this, it kind of sounds like a version of Pascal's Mugging. Perhaps we could call this: Pascal's Benefactor.

Comment author: MixedNuts 29 July 2011 01:59:32PM *  3 points [-]

It's just Pascal's regular Wager.

Edit: I mean, this presentation makes it look like Pascal's Wager. Cryonics is too high-probability to actually be Pascal's Wager.

Comment author: shokwave 29 July 2011 04:36:07PM 2 points [-]

As MixedNuts pointed out, it's Pascal's Wager - yet you have a point. Putting the argument like this might cause the Pascal's Wager Fallacy Fallacy (which is still one of my favourite posts on this site).

Comment author: Will_Newsome 30 July 2011 04:38:13AM 3 points [-]

Hm! Someone I know wants to write a post called "Pascal's Wager Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy", because (the claim is) that post doesn't correctly analyze the relevant social psychology involved when someone is afraid of being seen to commit to a very-possibly-indefensible-in-retrospect position where they predict they'll be seen as to-the-other-person-unjustifiably having chosen a predictably immoral or stupid course of action, or something like that.

Comment author: gjm 31 July 2011 11:06:01AM 1 point [-]

See this comment. (Disclaimer 1: it's mine. Disclaimer 2: my objection isn't really about the social psychology involved -- but I think that gives it more right to use the word "fallacy".)

Comment author: Gabriel 30 July 2011 03:09:50PM 1 point [-]

Then it would make sense to call it "Not-taking-social-costs-into-consideration Fallacy" but not "Pascal's Wager Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy". That post wasn't really about the feasibility of cryonics, it only made claims about the logical validity of comparing the reasoning behind cryonics to Pascal's Wager and that's not something that can be affected by social psychology.