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.

private_messaging comments on Fascists and Rakes - Less Wrong Discussion

39 Post author: philh 05 January 2014 12:41AM

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

Comments (67)

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

Comment author: private_messaging 06 January 2014 02:22:00AM *  0 points [-]

this will increase utility.

Or decrease utility, if the decreased population results in lower utility. Or increase utility less than some alternatives.

Likewise with the other examples; while you can of course assert about any action, no matter how harmful, that it is a net benefit (in a far enough future), trying to achieve a net benefit leads to different actions than trying to achieve the benefit for the sake of the group(s) that you personally belong to, and this difference shows very clearly.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 08 January 2014 04:14:49AM -1 points [-]

Likewise with the other examples

BTW, I at least partially agree with the argument against of drug legalization.

Comment author: private_messaging 12 January 2014 11:46:42AM *  -1 points [-]

The arguments that were originally used are what I refer to, not really the recent debates where old choices are rationalized on different grounds.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 12 January 2014 07:10:46PM -2 points [-]

Near as I can tell, this is very similar to the argument I made with some comments about how propensity to fall to said "devil's offers" was correlated with race.