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.

ericyu3 comments on Two kinds of population ethics, and Current-Population Utilitarianism - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: AlexMennen 17 June 2014 10:26PM

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

Comments (21)

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

Comment author: ericyu3 18 June 2014 06:58:22AM 0 points [-]

Define the "partial utility function" as how utility changes with x holding c constant (i.e. U(x) at a particular value of c). Changes in values change this partial utility function, but they never change the full utility function U(c,x). A real-world example: if you prefer to vote for the candidate that gets the most votes, then your vote will depend strongly on the other voters' values, but this preference can still be represented by a single, unchanging utility function.

I don't understand your second paragraph - why would having values as a variable be bad? It's certainly possible to change the utility function, but AlexMennen's point was the future values could still be taken into account even with a static utility function. If the utility function is constant and also depends on current values, then it needs to values into account as an argument (i.e. a variable).