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.

Manfred comments on A Basic Problem of Ethics: Panpsychism? - Less Wrong Discussion

-4 Post author: capybaralet 27 January 2015 06:27AM

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

Comments (16)

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

Comment author: Manfred 28 January 2015 04:51:09AM 2 points [-]

It's not that one has to have their one true definition all laid out before any progress can be made.

But if one cannot make any physical predictions if all atoms are "fleem" rather than not fleem, it's usually better to take a break from worrying about whether atoms are fleem. You might just be getting sidetracked by the ol' blegg/rube problem.

Comment author: Unknowns 30 January 2015 01:11:18AM 0 points [-]

I can't make any physical prediction from the fact that I am myself, rather than someone else. It doesn't stop me from caring about myself more than about other people.

Comment author: Manfred 30 January 2015 06:39:22AM 0 points [-]

I think you are confusing a lack of highly available consequences of being you, with a known lack of consequences.