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.

Logos01 comments on Life Extension versus Replacement - Less Wrong Discussion

13 Post author: Julia_Galef 30 November 2011 01:47AM

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

Comments (98)

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

Comment author: Logos01 30 November 2011 02:34:10AM 2 points [-]

In your scenario, the TOTAL years lived remains the same in both cases, but the AVERAGE utility goes far down in the second case. 80 years per person is a lot less than 800 years per person.

Not only that but there is a decent claim to be made to -- within certain bounds -- noting that ten people who live only 100 years is less preferable to a utilitarian than 1 person who lives 1,000 years, so long as we accept the notion that deaths cause others to experience negative utility. The same number of years are lived but even without attempting to average utility the 10x100 scenario has 9 additional negative-utility events the 1x1,000 does not.

Comment author: Prismattic 30 November 2011 04:19:37AM *  5 points [-]

Implied assumption: death causes more disutility to others than birth causes utility to others. Might be true, but ought to be included explicitly in any such calculation.

Comment author: Logos01 30 November 2011 04:25:09AM 0 points [-]

True.