= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
drethelin comments on Cryonics priors - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (22)
I think the moral difference is between Near and Far funds rather than between frivolous expenses and other things.
The Near Fund would be for things you obviously need and/or enjoy, a subset of which is frivolous expenses. These are the funds that you concretely feel the lack of. Food, toys, rent, medicine, etc.
the Far fund is things that seem like a good idea but need more effort and moral commitment to actually act on. Charity, Cryonics, Investing, Education etc. are far mode. These are funds beyond your necessities, that you spend based on complicated decisions about long-term impacts.
Because of how we think and feel about the impacts of these various concerns on our daily happiness etc, it's much more reasonable to talk about trading off cryonics vs charity than charity vs your daily latte.
Seems like it might be a good explanation of why so many people come up with this objection. I can't tell if you think this is a bug or a feature; I think it's a bug.