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.

Grey_ comments on Open thread, 30 June 2014- 6 July 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: DanielDeRossi 30 June 2014 10:58AM

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

Comments (246)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 02 July 2014 04:44:33PM 0 points [-]

But no mathematical argument will tell you the right way to measure and combine utilities . . .

Much the same could be said about potential probability functions.

I think what I'm looking for is some equivalent to Jaynes's "Desiderata" for probability, but in the realm of either basic utility functions or how to combine them.

. . . any more than it will tell you that you should be a utilitarian in the first place.

Being new to this, I'm also interested in a pointer to some kind of standard argument for (any kind of) utilitarianism. I mean something more than Yvain's wonderful little Consequentialism FAQ.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 03 July 2014 04:49:12PM 0 points [-]

I think what I'm looking for is some equivalent to Jaynes's "Desiderata" for probability, but in the realm of either basic utility functions or how to combine them.

The VNM theorem goes from certain hypotheses about your preferences to the existence of a utility function describing them. However, the utility function is defined only up to an affine transformation. This implies that given only that, there is no way to add up utilities, even the utilities of a single person. (You can, however , take weighted averages of them.) It also deals only with a single person, or rather, a single preference relation. It is silent on the subject of how to combine different people's preference relations or utility functions. There is no standard answer to the question of how to do this.

Being new to this, I'm also interested in a pointer to some kind of standard argument for (any kind of) utilitarianism.

You could try Peter Singer and the people who take that argument seriously.