Thomas comments on A response to "Torture vs. Dustspeck": The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas - Less Wrong

-4 Post author: Logos01 30 November 2011 03:34AM

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

Comments (100)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Thomas 02 December 2011 09:22:25AM *  1 point [-]

You have 50 years of a horrible torture and then 50*3^^^3 years of a pleasant life with no dust speck.

OR

50*(3^^^3+1) years of a pleasant life with a dust speck every 50 years.

What would you take?

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 03 December 2011 07:36:22AM *  1 point [-]

This analogy doesn't work, because if I had to choose between:
- 50 years of torture now, followed by 50*3^^^3 years of life
- 49 * 3^^^3 years now, followed by 100 years of torture

I'd also end up choosing the latter, though there's less life, and more torture -- just because the years of torture are further away.

Comment author: Thomas 03 December 2011 10:26:14AM *  -2 points [-]

So, you say, we are incapable to choose a better option for us. 50 years of torture plus 50*(3^^^3-1) years of a good life with no dust speck is a better then the second one, with a dust speck every 50 years and no torture - for 50 times 3^^^3 years?

We just can't/won't go for a better one?

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 03 December 2011 02:07:19PM 1 point [-]

So, you say, we are incapable to choose a better option for us.

Am pretty sure I didn't say we are "incapable" of anything, and I have to warn you I don't appreciate a tactic of putting words in my mouth: it's a berserk button for me. So please be careful about this.

But if you want me to say something using the word "incapable" in it, currently we're pretty incapable of understanding the scope of 3^^^3.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 02 December 2011 04:52:48PM 1 point [-]

I would almost certainly take the latter. So would everyone I've ever known. What does that demonstrate?

I mean, it's also almost certainly true that after a year of horrible torture, if you offered me a choice between another 49 years of horrible torture followed by 3^^^3 years of pleasant life, or death, I would choose death. But again... so what?

Comment author: Thomas 03 December 2011 07:12:29AM 0 points [-]

So, you'd opt for the worse option, according to this list?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 03 December 2011 02:13:42PM 2 points [-]

(nods) Likely, if I were somehow placed in a situation where I could make such a choice.

I mean, 50 years of horrible torture is scary as hell, and something I can just barely imagine. 3^^^3 years of pleasant life is so completely outside my experience that I can't even begin to imagine it. The odds that I would make any kind of sensible expected-utility calculation in that situation are basically zero... hell, I don't do all that well with real-life situations where I know that something mildly unpleasant now will bring me tangible benefits later.

Again: what does that demonstrate?

Comment author: Thomas 03 December 2011 02:48:27PM -1 points [-]

In a moment!

What about some other guy, where would you put him?

What about the case, where the 50 years of torture is in the middle? Or in the end?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 03 December 2011 05:02:39PM 0 points [-]

I expect I would choose the torture-free option in all these cases, if I were somehow faced with the choice, for basically the same reason: 50 years of torture is scary, and 3^^^3 years is basically inconceivable.

I would like you to get to a point some time soon.