Princess_Stargirl comments on Why Does Power Corrupt? - Less Wrong

28 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 October 2008 12:23AM

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

Comments (58)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: denis_bider2 14 October 2008 12:55:01AM 3 points [-]

Eliezer: I don't get your altruism. Why not grab the crown? All things being equal, a future where you get to control things is preferable to a future where you don't, regardless of your inclinations.

Even if altruistic goals are important to you, it would seem like you'd have better chances of achieving them if you had more power.

Unless, I guess, if you judge that the activities needed to keep power, and to remain alive while under increased threat, would be too much of an obstacle to your other goals.

The only valid reason I see not to grab power is a selfish one: if it would mean getting yourself into a mess that you don't really need or want. Which seems likely to be the case. But then this is a selfish motivation, not an altruistic one.

Comment author: Princess_Stargirl 21 September 2014 08:22:13PM 0 points [-]

If washington takes the crown he is helping set up a monarchy. And the next fellow may not be as good as him. Even very wise men/women tend to be pretty bad at picking sucessors. Marcus Aurelias is generally considered a deep thinker and a very able ruler. But all his years of good decisions were probably dwarfed by his mistake to leave the empite to comodus.

If Marcus Aurelias cannot be trusted to choose a sucessor idk who can. Even if Elizier can, can his sucessor?

(I am assuming here it will be a awhile until the singularity, if Elizier can be king until the singularity hits making him king is a very good idea).