The title of this post jumped out at me. From a comment of mine, long ago:
Maximize happiness in the individual … I say, “in the individual”, in strong opposition to dust specks. I remain puzzled by why the “shut up and multiply” maxim would not be accompanied by “shut up and divide”. (That is, 3^^^3 specks / 3^^^3 individuals = no pain.) I remain open to good arguments to the contrary—I haven’t read one yet.
EDIT: That last sentence is no longer true. I regard this comment by Eliezer as the best argument I’ve seen, and one that still confounds my moral intuitions on specks:
While some people tried to appeal to non-linear aggregation, you would have to appeal to a non-linear aggregation which was non-linear enough to reduce 3^^^3 to a small constant. In other words it has to be effectively flat. And I doubt they would have said anything different if I’d said 3^^^^3.
I do not think we are talking about the same subject/application. I do think you are using the phrase to refer to roughly the same concept, and in the same context of how to do ‘morality calculus’.
The title of this post jumped out at me. From a comment of mine, long ago:
EDIT: That last sentence is no longer true. I regard this comment by Eliezer as the best argument I’ve seen, and one that still confounds my moral intuitions on specks:
Actually, are we making the same point? Or am I just stealing your phrase for my own use?
I do not think we are talking about the same subject/application. I do think you are using the phrase to refer to roughly the same concept, and in the same context of how to do ‘morality calculus’.
Thanks, I forgot to Google that phrase. :) I’ll link to your comment.