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.

atucker comments on Non-personal preferences of never-existed people - Less Wrong Discussion

12 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 10 March 2011 07:54PM

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

Comments (69)

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

Comment author: atucker 12 March 2011 01:19:21AM 0 points [-]

I don't think most utilitarians claim to follow (or even know) their utility function so much as assert that utility maximization is the proper way to resolve moral conflicts.

Kind of how like physicists claim that there would be a theory of everything without actually knowing what it is.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 16 March 2011 03:59:00PM 1 point [-]

I perfectly agree that utility maximisation is indeed the proper way to resolve common moral conflicts.

But utility functions can be as complex as you need them to be! Saying you have a utility function does not constrain you virtually at all. But sometimes total utilitarians like to claim that their version is better because it is "simpler" or "more intuitive".

First of all, simplicity is not a virtue comparable with, say, human lives or happines, secondly I have different intuitions to them, and thirdly, their actual real utility function, if it were specified, would be unbelievably complex anyway.

I don't want to pour important moral insights down the drain, based on specious simplicity arguments....