= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
mattnewport comments on My main problem with utilitarianism - 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 (84)
Utilons are not equivalent to happiness. Utilons are basically defined as "whatever you care about," while happiness is a specific brain state.
For example, I don't want people to be tortured. If you save someone else from torture and don't tell me about it, you've given me more utilons without increasing my happiness one bit.
The converse is true as well - you can make someone happier without giving them utilons. From what I know of Eliezer, if you injected him with heroin, you'd make him (temporarily) happier, but I doubt you'd have given him any utilons.
Beware arguing by definition. Especially when your definition is wrong.
You caution against arguing by definition and yet claim definitions that are not universally agreed on as authoritative. There is genuine confusion over some of these definitions, it's useful to try and clarify what you mean by the words but you should refrain from claiming that is the meaning. For example, contrary definitions of happiness (it's not just a brain state):
Happiness
Wikipedia
I don't think it's uncontroversial to claim that utilons can be increased by actions you don't know about either.
The definitions really are at issue here and there are relevant differences between commonly used definitions of happiness.