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.

pwno comments on Ethicality of Denying Agency - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: pwno 07 July 2014 05:40AM

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

Comments (32)

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

Comment author: pwno 07 July 2014 08:56:54PM 0 points [-]

He might then profitably spend those two hours examining the underlying problem: why he chose to have those beers.

Why would this be a problem?

BTW, his mother already knows he's been drinking.

I didn't make it clear, but in the scenario she doesn't know.

Comment author: tut 08 July 2014 01:16:12PM 2 points [-]

I didn't make it clear, but in the scenario she doesn't know.

The scenario doesn't make sense. If you ever think that you find yourself in this scenario, please book a time with your doctor and explain to them that you just missed a flight because you couldn't resist drinking in the morning before you knew that you had to drive a car.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 08 July 2014 01:17:36PM 0 points [-]

Why would this be a problem?

He deliberately got himself into an awkward situation, for nothing more than the pleasure of drinking a couple of beers. No-brainers don't get much simpler, and for him to get this wrong suggests there's something more going on.

BTW, his mother already knows he's been drinking.

Another BTW: I didn't make that up arbitrarily, just reasonable conjecture from the ways of the world, and of mothers.

I didn't make it clear, but in the scenario she doesn't know.

You can add as many hypotheses as you like (as could I: "what if she asks point-blank?"), but as I said in my reply to shminux, it doesn't help. This scenario does not work as an illustration of the ethical problem. To scale the example up, it's like asking if a murderer should confess, when what he should have done is not do the murder.

Comment author: pwno 08 July 2014 06:26:16PM *  -1 points [-]

Yes, the way I wrote the scenario makes it seem like he deliberately got himself into an awkward situation for little benefit in return. And I see how this weakens the scenario as an illustration of the problem. So let me try improving the scenario:

Imagine he determined that refraining from disclosing the information to his mother was ethical. A week later, he finds himself in a similar situation. He wants to drink a couple of beers, but knows that by the time he'll finish, he'll need to drive his mother. This time he has no qualms about drinking, making the beer-drinking pleasure worth the consequences.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 08 July 2014 10:05:22PM 3 points [-]

Then his foot is set upon the road to ruin. Is that the implication you intended?