= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on On accepting an argument if you have limited computational power. - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (85)
The purpose of thought experiment is to analyse our theories in extreme situations. The understanding this gives can then be useful in non-extreme situations. An analogy to mathematics: When graphing y=x/(x^2+1) it is useful to consider the value of y as x goes to infinity, even if we only need a sketch for -2<x<2. Trolley Problems allow us to focus on the conflict between intuition and utilitarianism. The understanding thought experiments bring is important, even if their circumstances do not occur naturally. Indeed, the very fact that their circumstances do not occur naturally is what necessitates a thought experiment.
Yes, though it is a standard response that weird situations are weird, and we should not expect our tools for dealing with everyday situations to apply. (cf. the ethical literature on "desert island cases")
I'd respond to that thusly: In order to extend our tools a little bit (as is necessary to deal with new situations), it helps to imagine extending them further than necessary. Otherwise multiple extensions in series will render them hopeless.