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.

timtyler comments on Journal of Consciousness Studies issue on the Singularity - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: lukeprog 02 March 2012 03:56PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (85)
Tags: singularity

Comments (85)

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

Comment author: timtyler 05 March 2012 08:21:51PM *  3 points [-]

Each person has about a 1 in 12000 chance of having an unruptured aneurysm in the brain that could be detected and then treated after having a virtually risk free magnetic resonance angiography. Given the utility you likely assign to your own life it would be rational to undergo such a screening. At least it would make much more sense than signing up for cryonics. Yet you don't do it, do you?

Does this make sense? How much does the scan cost? How long does it take? What are the costs and risks of the treatment? Essentially, are the facts as you state them?

Expected utility maximization in combination with consequentialism is the ultimate recipe for extreme and absurd decisions and actions.

I don't think so. Are you thinking of utilitarianism? If so, expected utility maximization != utilitarianism.

Comment author: [deleted] 05 March 2012 08:32:58PM *  0 points [-]

expected utility maximization != utilitarianism.

Ok what's the difference here? By "utilitarianism" do you mean the old straw-man version of utilitarianism with bad utility function and no ethical injunctions?

I usually take utilitarianism to be consequentialism + max(E(U)) + sane human-value metaethics. Am I confused?

Comment author: timtyler 05 March 2012 08:39:09PM *  0 points [-]

The term "utilitarianism" refers to maximising the combined happiness of all people. The page says:

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes the overall "happiness".

So: that's a particular class of utility functions.

"Expected utility maximization" is a more general framework from decision theory. You can use any utility function with it - and you can use it to model practically any agent.

Utilitarianism is a pretty nutty personal moral philosophy, IMO. It is certainly very unnatural - due partly to its selflessness and lack of nepotism. It may have some merits as a politial philosophy (but even then...).

Comment author: [deleted] 05 March 2012 08:56:33PM *  0 points [-]

Thanks.

Is there a name for expected utility maximisation over a consequentialist utility function built from human value? Does "consequentialism" usually imply normal human value, or is it usually a general term?

Comment author: timtyler 05 March 2012 09:16:08PM *  0 points [-]

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism for your last question (it's a general term).

The answer to your "Is there a name..." question is "no" - AFAIK.

Comment author: [deleted] 05 March 2012 11:22:17PM 0 points [-]

The answer to your "Is there a name..." question is "no" - AFAIK.

I get the impression that most people around here approach morality from that perspective, it seems like something that ought to have a name.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit