Emile comments on [SEQ RERUN] Torture vs. Dust Specks - Less Wrong

4 Post author: MinibearRex 11 October 2011 03:58AM

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.

Comment author: Emile 12 October 2011 09:50:16AM 1 point [-]

Alternative phrasing of the problem: do you prefer a certain chance of having a dust speck in your eye, or a one-in-3^^^3 chance of being tortured for 50 years?

When you consider that we take action to avoid minor incomforts, but that we don't always take action to avoid small risks of violence or rape etc., we make choices like that much pretty often, with higher chances of bad things happening.

Comment author: Jack 12 October 2011 09:54:51AM 0 points [-]

Wait. Which side of the rephrasing corresponds to which side of the original?

Comment author: Emile 12 October 2011 10:01:50AM 3 points [-]

Certain chance of dust speck = 3^^^3 people get dust specks;

One-in-3^^^3 chance of torture = one person gets tortured for 50 years.

(Just consider a population of 3^^^3, and choose between them all getting dust specks, or one of them getting tortured. If I was in that population, I'd vote for the torture.)

Comment author: jpulgarin 12 October 2011 12:26:47PM 0 points [-]

This alternate phrasing (considering a population of 3^^^3 and choosing all dust specks vs one tortured) is actually quite a different problem. Since I care much more about my utility than the utility of a random person, then I feel a stronger pull towards giving everyone an extra dust speck as compared to the original phrasing.

I think a more accurate rephrasing would be: You will live 3^^^3 consecutive lives (via reincarnation of course). You can choose to get an extra dust speck in your eye in each lifetime, or be tortured in a single random lifetime.

Comment author: Emile 12 October 2011 12:41:17PM *  1 point [-]

I'm not sure how the population-based phrasing changes things. Note that I didn't specify whether the decider is part of that population.

And I don't think it even matters whether "I" am part of the population: if I prefer A to B for myself, I should also prefer A to B for others, regardless of how differently I weight my welfare vs. their welfare.

Comment author: jpulgarin 12 October 2011 01:04:31PM *  0 points [-]

You're right, for some reason I thought the decider was part of the population.

I've also updated towards choosing torture if I were part of that population.