= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FeepingCreature comments on Life Extension versus Replacement - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (98)
I already exist. I prefer to adopt a ruleset that will favor me continuing to existing. Adopting a theory that does not put disutility on me being replaced with a different human would be very disingenuous of me. Advocating the creation of an authority that does not put disutility on me being replaced with a different human would also be disingenuous.
For spreading your moral theory, you need the support of people who live, not people who may live. Thus, your moral theory must favor their interests.
[edit] Is this metautilitarianism?
I am rich because I own many slaves. I prefer to adopt a ruleset that will favor me by continuing to provide me with slaves. ... etc.
Which is not necessarily a bad choice for you!
Very few people are trying to genuinely chose the most good for the most people; they're trying to improve their group status by signalling social supportiveness. There's no point to that if your group will be replaced; even suicide bombers require the promise of life after death or rewards for their family.