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.

JonathanLivengood comments on A variant on the trolley problem and babies as unit of currency - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: Solvent 08 January 2012 08:13AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (63)

Comments (63)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: JonathanLivengood 09 January 2012 08:55:48AM 0 points [-]

Two things.

First, it is worth having the distinction between what is permissible to do and what is obligatory to do. One might plausibly think that in this case, it is permissible to push the button but not obligatory to do so.

Second, an interesting follow-up question, I think, is the point at which people tip. If you are like me, then you might balk at pressing the button for such small dollar amounts, but also, if you are like me, you probably have a dollar value at which you would flip to thinking that pressing the button is permissible. I actually think that at some value, pressing the button becomes obligatory. But what are those values? Can rational agents with the same evidence disagree about them?

Comment author: jimrandomh 09 January 2012 01:41:53PM 0 points [-]

First, it is worth having the distinction between what is permissible to do and what is obligatory to do. One might plausibly think that in this case, it is permissible to push the button but not obligatory to do so.

If you get an answer of "permissible but not obligatory", then you aren't finished; you've only concluded that it isn't overwhelmingly slanted in one direction, but you still need a decision.

Comment author: JonathanLivengood 09 January 2012 08:00:28PM 0 points [-]

If you get an answer of "permissible but not obligatory", then you aren't finished; you've only concluded that it isn't overwhelmingly slanted in one direction, but you still need a decision.

Why? In terms of algorithms, this might just be a place where you want to flip a coin. Or do you think that admissible decision procedures should always give the same answer to the same question? (If so, I'd love to know why you think that.)

But also, depending on whether you think rational agents with the same evidence can disagree about the button, you might think that "permissible-not-obligatory" is a worthwhile social category, even if you don't think it ever obtains for an individual. That is, you might want a set of laws that allow such acts but do not punish people if they choose not to perform such acts.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit