= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
OrphanWilde comments on Wild Moral Dilemmas - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (106)
Ah! You're assuming you have the moral obligation with or without the knowledge.
No, I take the moral obligation away entirely. For the USC, this will generally result in universes systematically becoming lukewarm universes. (Happy universes become downgraded since it saves money, unhappy universes become upgraded since it costs the company nothing, the incentive for the search being fueled by money-saving approaches, and I'm assuming a preference by the searchers for more happiness in the universes all else being equal.)
A law which required universal "Happiness" would just result in USC going bankrupt, and all the universes being turned off, once USC started losing more money than they could make. A law which required all universes -discovered- to be less than Happy to be made into Happy universes just results in company policy prohibiting looking in the first place.
So in your original example, both the rich man aware of misery and the rich man ignorant of it have no moral obligation?
If that's what you mean, I would describe the old system as "punishing knowledge" rather than "rewarding ignorance" since the baseline under your new system is like lack of knowledge under the old system.
I also suspect not many people would agree with this system.