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.

drethelin comments on Open thread, September 2-8, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

0 Post author: David_Gerard 02 September 2013 02:07PM

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

Comments (376)

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

Comment author: drethelin 06 September 2013 06:40:07PM 1 point [-]

do you think people should donate to science because that will reduce MORE suffering in the long term?

Comment author: [deleted] 07 September 2013 01:18:41AM *  0 points [-]

Nope. I just like science.

Upd: I understand why my other comments were downvoted. But this?

Comment author: drethelin 08 September 2013 09:46:27PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure, I didn't vote it. But my theory would be that you seem to be making fun of people who like to reduce suffering for no better reason than you like a different thing (I don't understand why you do x? is often code for x is dumb or silly).

Comment author: [deleted] 09 September 2013 03:11:59AM 0 points [-]

I don't think it's silly. I think it's silly to spend governmental money and encourage others to spend money on it, since it makes no sense. But if you personally enjoy it, well, that's great.

Comment author: drethelin 09 September 2013 04:00:23AM 1 point [-]

what do you mean by "makes no sense" ? Do you mean in the nihilistic sense that nothing really matters? You keep using the phrase as if it's a knockdown argument against reducing suffering, so it might be useful to clarify what you mean.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 September 2013 07:08:29AM *  0 points [-]

Yes, in nihilistic sense. If we follow the "what for?" question long enough, we will inevitably get to the point where there is no explanation, and we therefore may conclude that there is no sense in anything.

Comment author: drethelin 09 September 2013 07:11:29AM 4 points [-]

In that case, your question is already answered by the people who tell you that they want to. If nothing really matters than the only reasons to do things are internal to minds. In which case reducing suffering is simply a very common thing for minds in this area to want to do. Why? evolutionary advantage mayhaps. If you buy nihilism there is no reason to reduce suffering but there's also no reason no to and no reason to do anything else.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 September 2013 07:21:42AM *  0 points [-]

And this is exactly what I think, and exactly why I said that:

I think it's silly to spend governmental money and encourage others to spend money on it

and

But if you personally enjoy it, well, that's great.

Comment author: drethelin 09 September 2013 07:25:08AM 0 points [-]

but why? Why is it silly? What makes it silly? Literally nothing. You act as if government money should be reserved for things that "make sense" or have a reason but nothing does. Spending gov money or encouraging others to reduce suffering is exactly as meaningful as every other thing you could spend it on.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 September 2013 07:41:28AM 0 points [-]

Senselessness makes it silly. I not only act so but also think that doing anything is silly. What I'm doing right now is silly.

I shouldn't have included "encouraging others"; what makes governmental money different is that government acquired it's money by force without any reason to use force. And your ethical system has to allow usage of force without reason, for government to be ethical.

Comment author: [deleted] 21 September 2013 11:00:07PM *  0 points [-]

And some other people just like other people not suffering. Why should your like count more than theirs?

Comment author: [deleted] 22 September 2013 04:31:56AM 0 points [-]

Could you show me where I wrote that my like should count more than theirs?

Comment author: [deleted] 22 September 2013 07:23:28AM 0 points [-]

You didn't say that explicitly, but if yours doesn't count more than theirs, why should we spend money on yours but not theirs?

Comment author: [deleted] 22 September 2013 11:24:30AM *  0 points [-]

Because they can (looks like not) deal with suffering from suffering of others, without spending money on it, while enjoying spending money on science?