If “parameter” were “instrumental value”, that would mean you could set the parameter according to your values. That would be very similar to saying it was part of your values. The notion of “value” vs. “instrumental value” is probably bankrupt.
Well, instrumental value is a totally standard concept:
I think what you are saying is that because instrumental values arise out of intrinsic values we need not bother too much in distinguishing between them.
However, that isn’t right—there’s at least one important time to know what is an instrumental value and what is an intrinsic value—namely when self-improving.
No, I really think instrumental vs. intrinsic values is a bankrupt set of ideas, despite being standard. Our values were not generated by starting with a set of intrinsic values, then adding those instrumental values needed to achieve them. Similarly, I don’t think that we learn language by learning a set of fundamental words, and then defining all other words in terms of them. The link to my regrettably long post on values above is supposed to elucidate this (though I’m not sure it’s any clearer than what I just said).
No, I really think instrumental vs. intrinsic values is a bankrupt set of ideas, despite being standard. Our values were not generated by starting with a set of intrinsic values, then adding those instrumental values needed to achieve them.
Well, then please reconsider. Humans intrinsically value warmth, sweetness, fullness, orgasms, the absence of pain—and various other things. They instrumentally value money, qualifications, property rights, and so on. Mostly the instrumental values arise out of the intrinsic values—in the context of some environment.
There may be some wrinkles to this kind of model. There may be instinctive predispositions towards some instrumental values. There may be instrumental values that only develop as a result of certain types of interaction with the environment. However, overall, I fail to see how arguing with the significance of the instrumental / intrinsic value split is productive.
I am pretty sure that any more sophisticated model would still exhibit the same instrumental / intrinsic value division.
I don’t think you have the same notion of instrumental values in mind that everyone else has. Instrumental values aren’t values, properly. If X is an instrumental value, all this means is that X is useful for obtaining our values. Examples of instrumental values: money, natural resources, or computing power.
The problem with distinguishing instrumental and terminal values in humans is that it isn’t always clear whether you really do value, for example, justice, or if it’s just a heuristic for obtaining that which we do value.
Well, instrumental value is a totally standard concept:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_value
It is different from the equally-standard concept of intrinsic value:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_%28ethics%29
...so: it is not very clear what you mean.
I think what you are saying is that because instrumental values arise out of intrinsic values we need not bother too much in distinguishing between them.
However, that isn’t right—there’s at least one important time to know what is an instrumental value and what is an intrinsic value—namely when self-improving.
No, I really think instrumental vs. intrinsic values is a bankrupt set of ideas, despite being standard. Our values were not generated by starting with a set of intrinsic values, then adding those instrumental values needed to achieve them. Similarly, I don’t think that we learn language by learning a set of fundamental words, and then defining all other words in terms of them. The link to my regrettably long post on values above is supposed to elucidate this (though I’m not sure it’s any clearer than what I just said).
Well, then please reconsider. Humans intrinsically value warmth, sweetness, fullness, orgasms, the absence of pain—and various other things. They instrumentally value money, qualifications, property rights, and so on. Mostly the instrumental values arise out of the intrinsic values—in the context of some environment.
There may be some wrinkles to this kind of model. There may be instinctive predispositions towards some instrumental values. There may be instrumental values that only develop as a result of certain types of interaction with the environment. However, overall, I fail to see how arguing with the significance of the instrumental / intrinsic value split is productive.
I am pretty sure that any more sophisticated model would still exhibit the same instrumental / intrinsic value division.
I don’t think you have the same notion of instrumental values in mind that everyone else has. Instrumental values aren’t values, properly. If X is an instrumental value, all this means is that X is useful for obtaining our values. Examples of instrumental values: money, natural resources, or computing power.
The problem with distinguishing instrumental and terminal values in humans is that it isn’t always clear whether you really do value, for example, justice, or if it’s just a heuristic for obtaining that which we do value.