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.

Vaniver comments on Ambitious utilitarians must concern themselves with death - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Mitchell_Porter 25 October 2012 10:41AM

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

Comments (13)

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

Comment author: Vaniver 27 October 2012 01:30:45AM *  0 points [-]

In your opinion, who does have the most insight into morality?

Game theorists.

can one say "these lives should not have been created" and "these lives are still worth living"?

Yes, but why would one want to?

You once wrote "life on the farm is, for most, horrible". Would you still agree with that?

Yes. I will note that it was in the context of a rural America vs. an industrial America; given that real choice between potential states, I saw far more glory and happiness in the latter than the former.

Does it imply that antinatalism is correct in societies where most people are farmers?

No, because choices should be made in the context of the real alternatives facing the decision-maker. Agricultural lives may be worse suited to the preferences of most people than industrial lives, and industrial lives may be worse suited to the preferences of most people than post-singularity lives, but the choice facing any potential parent in any of those ages is "would I prefer another human related to me in era X, or not?" rather than "what era would I like my child to be born in?"