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.

BlindIdiotPoster comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: palladias 18 July 2013 02:23AM

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

Comments (304)

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

Comment author: BlindIdiotPoster 22 July 2013 11:20:46PM 3 points [-]

My intuition was that since a hypothetical immortal soul doesn't pass on the owner's genes and therefore doesn't contribute to genetic fitness, it should have little if any direct influence on evolutionary incentives.

It's true that an animal that somehow evolved a soul would look drastically different neurologically from a human, but we know empirically that wizards are mostly the same as muggles psychologically/neurologically, so it seems this doesn't happen to be the case. By the way, I agree with Draco's hypothesis that if souls do exist, muggles probably don't have them, since they don't seem to have gotten any other benefits from the magic patch.

I don't consider myself a particularly competent practitioner of counterfactual evopsych, so if you do, and still disagree, I suppose I'll have to update my beliefs.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 July 2013 12:10:53AM 7 points [-]

Brain size would almost instantly collapse (from consuming 20% of ATP) once cognitive processing was offloaded to the immortal decision-making engine.

Comment author: BlindIdiotPoster 23 July 2013 12:20:29AM 3 points [-]

What I mean by "immortal soul" in this case is just the Source of Magic backing up the brain state of wizards when they die. If the soul were capable of cognitive function independently of the brain then of course you' and Xachariah would be right.