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.

wgd comments on I Stand by the Sequences - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: Grognor 15 May 2012 10:21AM

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

Comments (248)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 15 May 2012 11:41:48AM 1 point [-]

I agree with your first 2 bullet points. I agree with the third, with the caveat that doing so leads to a greater risk of error. I'm a consequentialist with utilitarianism as a subset of my values. I think "culpable" refers to how society should treat people, and treating people who fail to save lives as murderers is infeasible and unproductive. I choose TORTURE over SPECKS in the relevant thought experiment, if we stipulate that there are 3^^^3 distinct possible people who can be specked, which in reality there aren't. I want to sign up for cryonics. I like EY's metaethics, and agree that lots of people are crazy.

In addition to that: I think UFA is a risk worth worrying about and working to mitigate and FAI is worth pursuing. I think EY's sequence on words is true, and makes conversations much easier when both people have read it.