= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CookieUtilityMonster comments on In favour of total utilitarianism over average - 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 (15)
Me agree. But remember, me gets more utility from a single chocolate chip than the entire range of possible utility variation across hundreds of trillions of human people.
Best way to increase total utility is to create and enslave as many people as possible, making cookies for me. The most negative-utility possible human life still is net positive utility for the universe if it manages to generate one delicious crunchy crumb in it's otherwise-miserable existence.
Utility monsters exist in both total and aggregate utilitarianism. These two kinds of utilitarianism are identical for a fixed population. It is only when you can add or remove people that they are different.
Would you accept a lottery where there was 1 ticket to maintain your life as a satisfied cookie utility monster and hundreds of trillions of tickets to become a miserable enslaved cookie maker?
Or, after rational reflection and experiencing the alternate possibilities, would you rather prefer a guaranteed life of threshold satisfaction?