= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Mark_Friedenbach comments on [LINK] Why Cryonics Makes Sense - Wait But Why - 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 (28)
Why would someone make major decisions based on metaphysical interpretations of quantum physics that are lacking experimental verifiability? That seems like poor life choices.
Tegmark 4 is not related to quantum physics. Quantum physics does not give an avenue for rescue simulations; in fact, it makes them harder.
As a simulationist, you can somewhat salvage traditional notions of fear if you retreat into a full-on absurdist framework where the point of your existence is to give a good showing to the simulating universes; alternately, risk avoidance is a good Schelling point for a high score. Furthermore, no matter how much utility you will be able to attain in Simulationist Heaven, this is your single shot to attain utility on Earth, and you shouldn't waste it.
It does take the sting off death though, and may well be maladaptive in that sense. That said - it seems plausible a lot of simulating universes would end up with a "don't rescue suicides" policy, purely out of a TDT desire to avoid the infinite-suicidal-regress loop.
I am continuously amused how catholic this cosmology ends up by sheer logic.
I find the often prevalent optimism on LW regarding this a bit strange. Frankly, I find this resurrection stuff quite terrifying myself.
Yeah. It does make me wonder if we should take a lot more critical stance towards the premises that lead us to it. Sure enough, the universe is under no obligation to make any sense to us; but isn't it still a bit suspicious that it's turning out to be kind of bat-shit insane?
As opposed to the usual "I've had a few beers and it seemed like a good idea at the time"..? X-)
Perhaps you shouldn't. That said, it is recommended by Eliezer Yudkowsky, and his words often weigh quite heavily here.
I don't necessarily agree that lacking experimental verifiability means that we shouldn't take something into account when making decisions, if we have enough reasons to think that it's true nevertheless.
Arguments from authority are equally ill advised :)
By the way you will find that Mr. Yudkowsky's positions are not held by everyone here.
Of course not. But whether people here agree with him or not, they usually at least think that his arguments need to be considered seriously.