Ben_Jones comments on Fake Utility Functions - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 06 December 2007 04:55PM

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

Comments (54)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Ben_Jones 07 December 2007 03:33:43PM 0 points [-]

If we assume that our morality arises from the complex interplay of a thousand shards of genetic desire, each with its own abstract 'value' in our minds, then I wholly agree that we can't reduce things down to a single function.

But clear this up for a non-expert: does stating that ethics cannot come from a single utility function imply that no amount of utility functions (i.e. no computer program) will do the job on their own? Surely an enormously complex morality-machine (NOT a Friendly AI!) would be of no application to human morality unless it had a few hard-coded values such those we place on life, fairness, freedom and so on? If only because this is the way *our* morality works.

If parental love is ultimately a genetic function, surely it's impossible to separate it from the biological substrate without simply reverse-engineering the brain? More bluntly, how can we write a value-free program that makes parental love look *sensible*?