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.

Lumifer comments on A rational approach to the issue of permanent death-prevention - Less Wrong Discussion

-4 Post author: Nanashi 11 February 2015 12:22PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (28)
Tags: life death

Comments (28)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 11 February 2015 05:19:45PM 3 points [-]

But if no one died due to starvation, we wouldn't be having any disagreement as to whether or not it's okay to steal a loaf of bread to save one's starving family.

You are still wrong. Imagine that starvation leaves you very weak, in constant pain, but alive. It is OK to steal a loaf of bread to feed your children? Let me also remind you that in Christian Hell no one dies :-/

The human existence does not revolve around death.

Comment author: Nanashi 11 February 2015 05:41:23PM 0 points [-]

Sure, I'll concede that in the edge case that we figure out how to prevent death, and have not in the process, figured out how to eliminate hunger pains (or if Christian Hell exists) then you're 100% right.

Either way though, stylistically that was a poor choice of opening sentences on my part. It doesn't add anything to the piece, and it's too easy to dispute it, thus distracting from the overall point.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit