To be honest, questions like these remind me of why it was completely stupid to aspire to being a rationalist. Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.
...unless you have something more important to achieve than bliss, or expect that you might discover some such thing if you relinquish enough ignorance.
First: Is there something better than bliss? Is bliss different than what the economists would call utility?
Second: Now I’m on the side of rationality, and hope to relinquish as much ignorance as possible. But it would be wrong to ignore the very real fears noted by Mass_Driver, who initiated this discussion.
Don’t get me wrong! I’m on board now. But isn’t there something of the basilisk about rationality? This is a real question. I expect it may be somewhere in a part of the sequences I haven’t read. If so, a pointer would be welcome. Unless it’s another basilisk, leading to a still lower circle of Hell. Ah, fuck it. Just let me know anyway.
First: Is there something better than bliss? Is bliss different than what the economists would call utility?
Very different — utility is about the things you consider valuable, and bliss is one feedback signal that tells you (often incorrectly) that you’re doing something valuable (or, more generally, tells you to keep doing whatever you just did). This distinction is explained pretty well in Terminal Values and Instrumental Values, in the part starting at “Consider the philosopher who asserts...”
it would be wrong to ignore the very real fears noted by Mass_Driver
I don’t disagree with that.
I expect it may be somewhere in a part of the sequences I haven’t read.
Don’t get me wrong! I’m on board now. But isn’t there something of the basilisk about rationality? This is a real question.
There is. Pretty much every transition upwards is one feared by the previous step- the infant feels worse off after leaving the womb, the adult feels worse off after puberty, and so on. But I see little to recommend the view that growth should be avoided because it is often unpleasant.
the infant feels worse off after leaving the womb, the adult feels worse off after puberty, and so on.
This is a minor quibble, but—the thing about the babies is speculation, since nobody really remembers how happy they might have been in the womb. My babies showed some evidence of discomfort in the cramped quarters of the womb (a lot of kicking, especially toward the end), and they displayed a lot of pleasure in things like nursing and cuddling and being played with once they got out into the world. If I had to guess I would say they were happier after birth.
For the puberty thing, I know that I felt much, much better once I was out of adolescence. So experiences vary.
Right, I think I misworded it (and it could be the point is totally wrong)- this stage seems worth it by our standards now but didn’t seem worth it by last stage’s standards.
...unless you have something more important to achieve than bliss, or expect that you might discover some such thing if you relinquish enough ignorance.
First: Is there something better than bliss? Is bliss different than what the economists would call utility?
Second: Now I’m on the side of rationality, and hope to relinquish as much ignorance as possible. But it would be wrong to ignore the very real fears noted by Mass_Driver, who initiated this discussion.
Don’t get me wrong! I’m on board now. But isn’t there something of the basilisk about rationality? This is a real question. I expect it may be somewhere in a part of the sequences I haven’t read. If so, a pointer would be welcome. Unless it’s another basilisk, leading to a still lower circle of Hell. Ah, fuck it. Just let me know anyway.
Very different — utility is about the things you consider valuable, and bliss is one feedback signal that tells you (often incorrectly) that you’re doing something valuable (or, more generally, tells you to keep doing whatever you just did). This distinction is explained pretty well in Terminal Values and Instrumental Values, in the part starting at “Consider the philosopher who asserts...”
I don’t disagree with that.
Off the top of my head, this is touched on in Why Truth? and Incremental Progress and the Valley. Though I feel like I’m forgetting at least one good one.
That’s an awesome and useful answer! No sarcasm or irony. I will read that at once. And upvoted.
P.S. God damn, the sequences are long.
Personally, I find I do better seeking satisfaction than happiness per se. YMMV, of course.
There is. Pretty much every transition upwards is one feared by the previous step- the infant feels worse off after leaving the womb, the adult feels worse off after puberty, and so on. But I see little to recommend the view that growth should be avoided because it is often unpleasant.
This is a minor quibble, but—the thing about the babies is speculation, since nobody really remembers how happy they might have been in the womb. My babies showed some evidence of discomfort in the cramped quarters of the womb (a lot of kicking, especially toward the end), and they displayed a lot of pleasure in things like nursing and cuddling and being played with once they got out into the world. If I had to guess I would say they were happier after birth.
For the puberty thing, I know that I felt much, much better once I was out of adolescence. So experiences vary.
Right, I think I misworded it (and it could be the point is totally wrong)- this stage seems worth it by our standards now but didn’t seem worth it by last stage’s standards.