Then how does one tell apant the true terminal values and instrumental ones?
I don’t know.
So like, one time I was playing football with my cousins on Thanksgiving, and hurt my foot bad enough that I thought it was broken. As I dug into why reality was different than I wanted, at first there was always something underneath.
“I wish my foot wasn’t hurting. Of course I wish my foot wasn’t hurting, who wouldn’t? I acknowledge the fact that my foot is hurting. Why is it hurting? Because it’s broken, lol.”
So then “I wish my foot wasn’t broken”, why’s it broken? Oh, because I was playing football and tripped. Why’d I trip? Shit just happens, man. So, “Of course shit happens, so of course I broke my foot when I was playing football with my family, so of course it hurts.” What’s the problem? Nothing, actually. Suffering resolved.
In that case, my desire to not be in pain bottomed out at not wanting to have hurt myself unnecessarily, and “shit just happens”, but like… the fact that it was serving as a terminal in this context is still dependent on the fact that I didn’t believe I could do anything about it. If there had been some nootropic that cuts the rate of mistakes to 10%, then “Why did shit happen?” now has an answer of “Because you didn’t improve your brain function, dummy”, and we’re back to the races.
I know how to get to the practical bottom of things, for a given context. But as some sort of general case where we remove “all” practical limits… I dunno man. I’m not sure the question is well formed. I’m not sure it’s not.
Does it mean that the CEV of an individual human
I don’t know where it grounds out, just where it doesn’t. Which is useful on the margin, and maybe even large margins, but in the event of a singularity where limits are removed past the point where we know what to make of it.. it’s still tough to say what that means kinda by definition.
Friston has some insights which seem relevant to me though. He talks about his “theory of every thing” (humorously distinct from “theory of everything”), and explains that every thing that exists must necessarily resist entropic forces towards disintegration or they would cease to exist. So in that sense, everything that exists seeks to maintain its own existence -- including drops of oil in water.
Humans obviously tend to actively maintain their own existence, but also lineages of humans on longer timescales. It’s not clear to me what happens when these things conflict and what “lineage” actually means once transhuman stuff becomes possible.
I don’t know.
So like, one time I was playing football with my cousins on Thanksgiving, and hurt my foot bad enough that I thought it was broken. As I dug into why reality was different than I wanted, at first there was always something underneath.
“I wish my foot wasn’t hurting. Of course I wish my foot wasn’t hurting, who wouldn’t? I acknowledge the fact that my foot is hurting. Why is it hurting? Because it’s broken, lol.”
So then “I wish my foot wasn’t broken”, why’s it broken? Oh, because I was playing football and tripped. Why’d I trip? Shit just happens, man. So, “Of course shit happens, so of course I broke my foot when I was playing football with my family, so of course it hurts.” What’s the problem? Nothing, actually. Suffering resolved.
In that case, my desire to not be in pain bottomed out at not wanting to have hurt myself unnecessarily, and “shit just happens”, but like… the fact that it was serving as a terminal in this context is still dependent on the fact that I didn’t believe I could do anything about it. If there had been some nootropic that cuts the rate of mistakes to 10%, then “Why did shit happen?” now has an answer of “Because you didn’t improve your brain function, dummy”, and we’re back to the races.
I know how to get to the practical bottom of things, for a given context. But as some sort of general case where we remove “all” practical limits… I dunno man. I’m not sure the question is well formed. I’m not sure it’s not.
I don’t know where it grounds out, just where it doesn’t. Which is useful on the margin, and maybe even large margins, but in the event of a singularity where limits are removed past the point where we know what to make of it.. it’s still tough to say what that means kinda by definition.
Friston has some insights which seem relevant to me though. He talks about his “theory of every thing” (humorously distinct from “theory of everything”), and explains that every thing that exists must necessarily resist entropic forces towards disintegration or they would cease to exist. So in that sense, everything that exists seeks to maintain its own existence -- including drops of oil in water.
Humans obviously tend to actively maintain their own existence, but also lineages of humans on longer timescales. It’s not clear to me what happens when these things conflict and what “lineage” actually means once transhuman stuff becomes possible.