= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
orthonormal comments on Concrete vs Contextual values - 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 (32)
To me it seems obvious from looking at the history of the earth that the world changes and what might be effective at one point is not necessarily so in the future.
Is it up to me to show that "all things aren't equal", or is it up to you to show that "all things are equal"? Whose opinion should be the default position that needs to be refuted?
I think I have given sufficient real world examples to at least make further thought into this matter worthwhile. Probably we should both try and argue the others side or something.
Well, some things change, but the examples we have of general intelligence are all cross-domain enough to handle such change. Human beings are more intelligent than chimps; no plausible change in the environment that leaves both humans and chimps alive will result in chimps developing more optimization power than humans. The scientific community in the modern world does a better job of focusing human intelligence on problem-solving than does a hunter-gatherer religion; no change in the environment that leaves our scientists alive will allow our technology to be surpassed by the combined forces of animist tribes from the African jungles.