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.

David_Gerard comments on Against utility functions - Less Wrong Discussion

40 Post author: Qiaochu_Yuan 19 June 2014 05:56AM

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

Comments (87)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 20 June 2014 03:07:02PM 2 points [-]

Relevant question: what does the cognitive science literature on choice-making, preference, and valuation have to say about all this? What mathematical structure actually does model human preferences?

Given that we run on top of neural networks and seem to use some Bayesian algorithms for certain forms of learning (citations available), I currently expect that our choice-making mechanisms might involve conditioning on features or states of our environment at some fundamental level.

Comment author: David_Gerard 21 June 2014 09:48:49PM 0 points [-]

My first guess would be that evolution has selected us for circular preferences that our genes money-pump so that we will propagate them. You can't get off this ride while you're human.

Comment author: [deleted] 21 June 2014 10:12:59PM 2 points [-]

You can't get off this ride while you're human.

Is that a challenge?

Comment author: David_Gerard 21 June 2014 10:36:39PM *  -1 points [-]

:-) I mean that if you embody human value, you'll probably be a money-pumpable entity. Very few humans actually achieve an end to desire while still alive and mentally active.

Comment author: [deleted] 22 June 2014 07:08:01AM 1 point [-]

I'll take the challenge, then. I was already walking around thinking that the Four Noble Truths of the Buddha are a bunch of depressing bullshit that need to be fixed.