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.

TheOtherDave comments on Hedonic vs Preference Utilitarianism in the Context of Wireheading - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: jkaufman 29 June 2012 01:50PM

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

Comments (53)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 29 June 2012 06:18:35PM 1 point [-]

My usual attitude is that our brains are not unified coherent structures, our minds still less so, and that just because I want X doesn't mean I don't also want Y where Y is incompatible with X.

So the search for some single thing in my brain that I can maximize in order to obtain full satisfaction of everything I want is basically doomed to failure, and the search for something analogous in my mind still more so, and the idea that the former might also be the latter strikes me as pure fantasy.

So I approach these sorts of thought experiments from two different perspectives. The first is "do I live in a world where this is possible?" to which my answer is "probably not." The second is "supposing I'm wrong, and this is possible, is it good?"

That's harder to answer, but if I take seriously the idea that everything I value turns out to be entirely about states of my brain that can be jointly maximized via good enough wireheading, then sure, in that world good enough wireheading is a fine thing and I endorse it.

Comment author: Mark_Lu 30 June 2012 09:05:48AM 1 point [-]

just because I want X doesn't mean I don't also want Y where Y is incompatible with X

In real life you are still forced to choose between X and Y, and through wireheading you can still cycle between X and Y at different times.