Choosing what gives the “best chance of winning” is good advice for a two-valued utility function, but I’m also interested in reducing the severity of my loss under uncertainty and misfortune.
I guess “maximizing expected utility” isn’t as sexy as “winning”.
I don’t think so. I take “wining” to be actualization of one’s values, which encompasses minimizing loss.
Furthermore, I think it actually helps to make the terms “sexy”, because I am a heuristic human; my brain is wired for narratives and motivated by drama and “coolness.” Framing ideas as something Grand and Awesome makes them matter to me emotionally, makes them a part of my identity, and makes me more likely to apply them.
Similarly, there are certain worthwhile causes for which I fight. They ARE worth fighting for, but I’m deluding myself if I act as if I’m so morally superior that I support them only because the problems are so pressing that I couldn’t possibly not do anything, that I have a duty to fulfill. That may be true, but it is also true that I disposed to be a fighter, and I am looking for a cause for which to fight. Knowing this, dramatizing the causes that actually do matter (as great battles for the fate of the human species) will motivate me to pursue them.
I have to be careful (as with anything), not to allow this sort of framing to distort my perception of the real, but I think as long as I know what I am doing, and I contain my self-manipulation to framing (and not denial of facts), I am served by it.
Winning is a conventional dictionary word, though. You can’t easily just redefine it without causing confusion. “Winning” and “maximising” have different definitions and connotations.
Choosing what gives the “best chance of winning” is good advice for a two-valued utility function, but I’m also interested in reducing the severity of my loss under uncertainty and misfortune.
I guess “maximizing expected utility” isn’t as sexy as “winning”.
Indeed. Forget about “winning”. It is not sexy if it is wrong.
I don’t think so. I take “wining” to be actualization of one’s values, which encompasses minimizing loss.
Furthermore, I think it actually helps to make the terms “sexy”, because I am a heuristic human; my brain is wired for narratives and motivated by drama and “coolness.” Framing ideas as something Grand and Awesome makes them matter to me emotionally, makes them a part of my identity, and makes me more likely to apply them.
Similarly, there are certain worthwhile causes for which I fight. They ARE worth fighting for, but I’m deluding myself if I act as if I’m so morally superior that I support them only because the problems are so pressing that I couldn’t possibly not do anything, that I have a duty to fulfill. That may be true, but it is also true that I disposed to be a fighter, and I am looking for a cause for which to fight. Knowing this, dramatizing the causes that actually do matter (as great battles for the fate of the human species) will motivate me to pursue them.
I have to be careful (as with anything), not to allow this sort of framing to distort my perception of the real, but I think as long as I know what I am doing, and I contain my self-manipulation to framing (and not denial of facts), I am served by it.
I think you’re defining “winning” too strictly. Sometimes a minor loss is still a win, if the alternative was a large one.
Winning is a conventional dictionary word, though. You can’t easily just redefine it without causing confusion. “Winning” and “maximising” have different definitions and connotations.
The first definition from google—Be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict).
This is no different than I or most people would define it, and I don’t think it contradicts with how I used it.
“Winning” refers to outcomes, not to actions, so it should just be “maximizing utility”.