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.

hen comments on Emotional Basilisks - Less Wrong Discussion

-2 Post author: OrphanWilde 28 June 2013 09:10PM

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

Comments (28)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 28 June 2013 11:24:42PM *  2 points [-]

Yes, none, any amount at all for any amount at all...assuming no akrasia, and as long as you don't mean 'right thing to do' in some kind of merely conventional sense. But that's just because, without quotation marks, the right thing to do is the formal object of a decision procedure.

If that's so, then your question is similar to this:

Would you infer that P if P were the consequent of a sound argument? If not, under what other circumstances would you not infer the consequent of a sound argument?