notsonewuser comments on Not for the Sake of Happiness (Alone) - Less Wrong

48 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 November 2007 03:19AM

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

Comments (94)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: Grognor 29 September 2011 03:42:22AM *  5 points [-]

In the agonizing process of reading all the Yudkowsky Less Wrong articles, this is the first one I have had any disagreement with whatsoever.

This is coming from a person who was actually convinced by the biased and obsolete 1997 singularity essay by Yudkowsky.

Only, it's not so much a disagreement as it is a value differential. I don't care the processes by which one achieves happiness. The end results are what matter, and I'll be damned if I accept having one less hedon or one less utilon out there because of a perceived value in working toward them rather than automatically gaining them. It sounds to me like expecting victims of depression to work through it and experience the joy of overcoming depression, instead of, say, our hypothetical pill that just cures their depression. It is a sadness that nothing like that exists.

At the risk of (further) lowering my own status, I'll also say that I really really really do wish the "do anything" Star Trek Holodecks were here. Now, it might matter to me that simulated oral sex is not from a real person who made that decision on her evolution-based human terms, but that is another matter of utilons.

Edited to add: perhaps worth noting is that I would have accepted the deal given by the Superhappies in Three Worlds Collide, though I might have tried to argue that the "having humans eat babies as well" thing is not necessary, even knowing I probably would not succeed.

Comment author: notsonewuser 02 October 2013 07:59:04PM 0 points [-]

I don't have any objection to you wireheading yourself. I do object to someone forcibly wireheading me.