= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jayson_Virissimo comments on On Terminal Goals and Virtue Ethics - 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 (205)
Is it though, or do people want to survive in order to achieve other goals? Many people (I think) wouldn't want to continue living if they were in a vegetative state with ultra-low probability of regaining their ability to live normally (and therefore, achieve other goals).
I am pretty sure people have a biologically hardwired desire to survive. It is terminal X-D
Yes, but do note the difference between "I survive" and "my brain-dead body survives".
If someone is persuaded to sacrifice themsself for a cause X, is cause X then more-than-terminal?
I suppose you you could say that, survival was never their terminal goal. But, to me that has a just so quality. You can identify a terminal goal from any life history, but you can't predict anything.
Humans have multiple values, including multiple terminal values. They do not necessary form any coherent system and so on a regular basis conflict with one another. This is a normal state of being for human values. Conflicts get resolved in a variety of ways, sometimes by cost-benefit analysis, and sometimes by hormonal imbalance :-)
If there is no coherence or stability in the human value system, then there are no terminal values, in any sense that makes a meaningful distinction. Anarchies don't have leaders either.
"Terminal" does NOT mean "the most important". It means values which you cannot (internally) explain in terms of other values, you have them just because you have them. They are axioms.