BlackNoise comments on Open Thread, May 1-15, 2012 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: OpenThreadGuy 01 May 2012 04:14AM

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

Comments (264)

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

Comment author: BlackNoise 01 May 2012 04:27:47PM 1 point [-]

If only for the fact that other people who share my values, or play the same game and therefore play by the same rules, will desire the object even more.

How about if there were two worlds - one where they care about whether a spacetime trajectory does or does not go through a destroy-rebuild cycle, and one where they spend the effort on other things they value. In that case, in which world would you rather live in?

The Champagne example helps, I can understand putting value on effort for attainment, but I'd like another clarification:

If you have two rocks where rock 1 is brought from mars via spaceship, and rock 2 is the same as rock 1 only after receiving it you teleport it 1 meter to the right. Would you value rock 2 less than rock 1? If yes, why would you care about that but not about yourself undergoing the same?

Comment author: XiXiDu 01 May 2012 05:11:04PM *  -1 points [-]

How about if there were two worlds - one where they care about whether a spacetime trajectory does or does not go through a destroy-rebuild cycle, and one where they spend the effort on other things they value. In that case, in which world would you rather live in?

It is not that important. I would trade that preference for more important qualities. But that line of reasoning can also lead to the destruction of all complex values. I have to draw a line somewhere or end up solely maximizing the quality that is most important.

If you have two rocks where rock 1 is brought from mars via spaceship, and rock 2 is the same as rock 1 only after receiving it you teleport it 1 meter to the right. Would you value rock 2 less than rock 1?

Rock 1 and 2 would be of almost equal value to me.