WhySpace comments on Fermi paradox of human past, and corresponding x-risks - Less Wrong

6 Post author: turchin 01 October 2016 05:01PM

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

Comments (18)

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

Comment author: WhySpace 02 October 2016 05:32:18PM *  2 points [-]

As a side note, this might also be interesting, purely from a utilitarian standpoint. If insect suffering matters, that would completely dwarf all human moral weight, since there are 10^18 of them but only 10^9 of us.

However, perhaps we don't care morally about animals which can't pass the mirror test, on the assumption that this means they have no self-image, and therefore no consciousness. They could feel pain and other stimuli, but there would be no internal observer to notice their own suffering.

If that's the case, animal welfare might still dominate over human welfare, but by a smaller margin. Doing what I described in the previous comment would let us estimate the value of future life in general, if we can determine to within an order of magnitude or so how much we value animals with various traits. This is critical for questions like whether terraforming mars is net positive or net negative.

Comment author: scarcegreengrass 06 October 2016 03:39:44PM 1 point [-]

I actually drew up a spreadsheet to estimate this: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xnfsDuC0ddUxvKekGLJ5QA5nrXxzked7K-k6jqUm538/edit?usp=sharing

I agree with you about the numbers: If there were say 10^15 insects then their moral weight might be in question. However there are actually more like 10^18, which is huge even for very small per-insect weightings.