You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Armok_GoB comments on How best to show dying is bad - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: Zvi 08 March 2011 03:18PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (70)

Comments (70)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Armok_GoB 08 March 2011 06:07:56PM *  1 point [-]
  1. Our not wanting to die is a bit of irrational behavior selected for by evolution. The universe doesn’t care if you’re there or not. The contrasting idea that you are the universe is mystical, not rational.

Preferences are not rational or rational etc.

  1. The idea that you are alive “now” but will be dead “later” is irrational. Time is just a persistent illusion according to relativistic physics. You are alive and dead, period.

I want the me-aliveness part to be as large as possible. That timeless crystal should contain as much actions and thoughts of "me" as possible.

  1. A cyber-replica is not you. If one were made and stood next to you, you would still not consent to be shot.

Yes I would.

  1. Ditto a meat replica

Ditto I would.

  1. If you believe the many worlds model of quantum physics is true (Eliezer does), then there already are a vitually infinite number of replicas of you already, so why bother making another one?

Same answer as to the relativity one, I care about my measure.

Comment author: JGWeissman 08 March 2011 06:16:05PM 8 points [-]

A cyber-replica is not you. If one were made and stood next to you, you would still not consent to be shot.

Yes I would.

Ditto a meat replica

Ditto I would.

This seems inconsistant with your other answers that you care about increasing your measure / instantiation in the block universe. The idea that you should consent to die because you have a replica is a fake bullet that you don't need to bite, you like having more copies of yourself.

Comment author: Armok_GoB 08 March 2011 09:14:02PM 1 point [-]

I probably implicitly assumed the question was if I'd object to it more than some random item I own that'd be equally expensive to replace.

Comment author: Clippy 08 March 2011 07:12:06PM *  1 point [-]

The point of numbering is to assign a unique, easily-generated identifier for each subsection of the text, and your comment is written in a way that uses numbering but defeats that purpose.

Comment author: JGWeissman 08 March 2011 07:17:15PM 4 points [-]

The apparently strange numbering is a result of quirky auto formatting that expects items in a numbered list not to be seperated by other paragraphs, not of how user:Armok_GoB intended the comment to look.

Comment author: Clippy 08 March 2011 08:36:22PM *  4 points [-]

Are there users that cannot see comments they have submitted? Or cannot edit them? Or cannot make numbers appear except through the markup system used for comments on this internet website? Is User:Armok_GoB a User of at least one of these types?

Comment author: Armok_GoB 08 March 2011 09:10:10PM 1 point [-]

Yes, although the problem causing this inability resides in the parts of the system residing downstream from the screen.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit