Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

thomblake comments on Zombie existential angst? (Not p-zombies, just the regular kind. Metaphorically.) - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: Annie0305 20 May 2012 10:41AM

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

Comments (43)

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

Comment author: thomblake 24 May 2012 08:22:56PM 0 points [-]

This is almost a direct self-contradiction, given the utility-function formalism

Yes, I think you would have to take it less formally here.

Comment author: MagnetoHydroDynamics 24 May 2012 08:55:59PM 0 points [-]

I am sorry. It appears I can't. I have internalized "there is only utilons" too strongly. What has been seen cannot be unseen, and all I see is a contradiction in terms.

Comment author: thomblake 24 May 2012 09:36:56PM 1 point [-]

Sorry, I meant "ignore that part". The 'being' is clearly a human. "Didn't really like" can be seen as a description of the sensory experience of taste, while "valued" can be seen as an actual relevant-to-utility value. If possible, such an agent might self-modify to like the taste of broccoli. If not, then it will just be a very sad panda.

Comment author: MagnetoHydroDynamics 24 May 2012 09:57:51PM 0 points [-]

I fail to see the problem. If broccoli tastes good to me I value it. If it is healthy I value it. If it is right to eat broccoli I value it. And so with the converse of all those statements.

Comment author: thomblake 28 May 2012 07:13:06PM *  0 points [-]

all I see is a contradiction in terms.

I fail to see the problem.

Success!

Comment author: MagnetoHydroDynamics 28 May 2012 10:51:06PM 0 points [-]

Don't cleave my words. I do not value it.

What I am pointing out is that to say "I do not like doing X but I value X" is a contradiction in terms when viewed with Utilon glasses.

I fail to see your ploblem's relevance because of the above.