Kaj_Sotala comments on Crossing the experiments: a baby - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 05 August 2013 12:31AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (90)
Tags: something_to_protect personal baby

Comments (90)

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

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 07 August 2013 09:59:10AM 1 point [-]

My point was that your favorite theory cannot make sense of what people take themselves to be doing in situations such as those discussed above

Negative utilitarianism is a normative theory, not a descriptive one.

Comment author: Pablo_Stafforini 07 August 2013 10:58:07AM *  0 points [-]

This is true. But some descriptive facts may provide evidence against a normative theory. The implicit argument was:

  1. People often believe that they are justified in undergoing some pain in order to experience greater pleasure.
  2. Negative utilitarianism implies that these people are fundamentally mistaken.
  3. If (2), then this provides some reason to reject negative utilitarianism.

Of course, the argument is by no means decisive. In fact, I think there are much stronger objections to NU.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 07 August 2013 02:55:01PM -2 points [-]

Negative utilitarianism implies that these people are fundamentally mistaken.

I'm not sure of what this even means. Negative utilitarianism implies one set of preferences, which not everyone shares. People who have different preferences aren't mistaken in any sense, they just want different things.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit