How do they justify the confidence of being able to affect the far far future positively rather than negatively, or at all? That seems rather presumptuous (In Bostrom’s “presumptuous philosopher” sense). Which is also the reason where Pascal’s wager fails.
How do they justify the confidence of being able to affect the far far future positively rather than negatively, or at all? That seems rather presumptuous (In Bostrom’s “presumptuous philosopher” sense). Which is also the reason where Pascal’s wager fails.