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.

Toggle comments on Superintelligence 9: The orthogonality of intelligence and goals - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: KatjaGrace 11 November 2014 02:00AM

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

Comments (78)

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

Comment author: Toggle 11 November 2014 06:31:35PM 2 points [-]

Potential source of misunderstanding: we do have stated 'terminal goals', sometimes. But these goals do not function in the same way that a paperclipper utility function maximizes paperclips- there are a very weird set of obstacles, which this site generally deals with under headings like 'akrasia' or 'superstimulus'. Asking a human about their 'terminal goal' is roughly equivalent to the question 'what would you want, if you could want anything?' It's a form of emulation.

Comment author: Lumifer 11 November 2014 06:45:35PM 0 points [-]

But these goals do not function in the same way that a paperclipper utility function maximizes paperclips

Sure, because humans are not utility maximizers.

The question, however, is whether terminal goals exist. A possible point of confusion is that I think of humans as having multiple, inconsistent terminal goals.

Here's an example of a terminal goal: to survive.