= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nisan comments on When what is rational is not what is "right" - 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 (17)
This is something I'm confused by. Musicians perform on the street for donations. I enjoy this enough that if they played with magical instruments that I could only hear after making a donation. I would gladly pay. And if no one donated, the street musicians would not play. Therefore, by Kantian/timeless considerations, I should donate. But when I go into Kantian/timeless mode, it seems much more important to give that money to the Against Malaria Foundation. Should I donate to street musicians or not?
This is an instance of the more general question of whether I want to apply timeless reasoning to my selfish goals.
This doesn't follow. Other people do, in fact, pay street musicians. Their decision to do so is not at all related to your decision. They are not modelling your decision or executing any algorithm remotely like TDT.
Going "timeless" is orthogonal to arbitrarily being nice. TDT would not preclude making such donations but if a TDT agent did make them (in the circumstances described) it would be out of intrinsically valuing the altruistic act or some other additional nuance of it's utility function unrelated to the "it will make me get to hear music" term.
Perhaps. It comes out of your "warm fuzzies" budget.
Ah. Do you disagree generally with Gary Drescher's thesis that human morality is an approximation to timeless reasoning?
Not as a decision theoretic prerogative. I do see certain parallels.