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.

Wei_Dai 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.

Comment author: Wei_Dai 19 June 2014 09:40:48PM *  2 points [-]

There are two different kinds of questions that could be considered to fall under the subject of population ethics: “What sorts of altruistic preferences do I have about the well-being of others?”, and “Given all the preferences of each individual, how should we compromise?”.

Instead of "population ethics", you might want to use "utilitarian aggregation" in this sentence. I'm pretty sure "population ethics" is never considered to cover the latter question, which besides "utilitarian aggregation" is also studied under "game theory" or perhaps "cooperative game theory" or "bargaining theory" to be more specific. (ETA: I wrote a post which links to some texts on cooperative game theory, which you may be interested in.)

Comment author: AlexMennen 19 June 2014 10:25:53PM *  0 points [-]

I had gotten the impression that people often failed to distinguish between the two questions, although I suppose it's possible that they've all been refering to the first and that I've just been confused because when I hear "utility", I immediately think VNM. If that is the case, then I suppose you're right that I shouldn't be using population ethics there. I'm also somewhat averse to using "utility aggregation" in that sentence because I'd like that term to refer solely to the second question. [Edit: oops, I misread you. Perhaps "utilitarian aggregation" is a better term for the thing that includes both questions.]