= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Firewalling the Optimal from the Rational - 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 (339)
I'll note that "no-one benefits" is different than "it leaves me and everyone else worse off."
So, what kinds of things can outweigh that terminal utility, and on what basis do they do so?
Oh all sorts of things - I'm not a strong defender of freedom. I'll happily, say, prevent a drunk friend from doing something very dangerous. I don't mean that that's where all or even most terminal utility comes from - I just mean that it isn't literally zero, that there are at least some costs it's enough to outweigh. Assuming as you do that I somehow have certain knowledge, and supposing someone about to die wants to watch a terrible movie that won't make them happy, and I have the option of silently removing it from the list of options so that they end up with a better choice, there is still some value in them getting what they wanted.
Fair enough.
For my own part, while there are all sorts of things that might lead me to endorse the watching of a movie that would make someone unhappy -- that is, there are values other than happiness -- and some of those values might be best achieved in practice by letting individuals choose, them getting what they wanted isn't in and of itself one of them.