= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kyrorh comments on On Caring - 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 (272)
That is the thing that I never got. If I tell my brain to model a mind that cares, it comes up empty. I seem to literally be incapable of even imagining the thought process that would lead me to care for people I don't know.
If anybody knows how to fix that, please tell me.
Why do you think it needs fixing?
I think this might be holding me back. People talk about "support" from friends and family which I don't seem to have, most likely because I don't return that sentiment.
Holding you back from what?
Also, you said (emphasis mine) "incapable of even imagining the thought process that would lead me to care for people I don't know" -- you do know your friends and family, right?
excellent question. I think I'm on the wrong track and something else entirely might be going on in my brain. Thank you.
Obviously your mileage may vary, but I find it helps to imagine a stranger as someone else's family/friend. If I think of how much I care about people close to me, and imagine that that stranger has people who care about them as much as I can about my brother, then I find it easier to do things to help that person.
I guess you could say I don't really care about them, but care about the feelings of caring other people have towards them.
If that doesn't work, this is how I originally though of it. If a stranger passed by me on the street and collapsed, I would care about their well being (I know this empirically). I know nothing about them, I only care about them due to proximity. It offends me rationally that my sense of caring is utter dependent on something as stupid as proximity, so I simply create a rule that says "If I would care about this person if they were here, I have to act like I care if they are somewhere else". Thus, utilitarianism (or something like it).
It's worth noting that another, equally valid rule would be "If I wouldn't care about someone if they were far away, there's no reason to care about them when they happen to be right here". I don't like that rule as much, but it does resolve what I see as an inconsistency.
Thank you. That seems like a good way of putting it. I seem to have problems thinking of all 7 billion people as individuals. I will try to think about people I see outside as having a life of their own even if I don't know about it. Maybe that helps.
I think this is the OP's point - there is no (human) mind capable of caring, because human brains aren't capable of modelling numbers that large properly. If you can't contain a mind, you can't use your usual "imaginary person" modules to shift your brain into that "gear".
So - until you find a better way! - you have to sort of act as if your brain was screaming that loudly even when your brain doesn't have a voice that loud.
Why should I act this way?
To better approximate a perfectly-rational Bayesian reasoner (with your values.)
Which, presumably, would be able to model the universe correctly complete with large numbers.
That's the theory, anyway. Y'know, the same way you'd switch in a Monty Haul problem even if you don't understand it intuitively.
What makes you care about caring?