Lefties and righties is just a convention case, if humans had three arms, two on the right, there might have been a matter of fact as to coming from which arm preference things go better.
I think this fear of other agents taking over the world is some form of reminiscent ingroup outgroup bias. To begin with, on the limit, if you value A B and C intrinsically but you have to do D1 D2 and D3 instrumentally, you may initially think of doing D1 D2 and D3. but what use would it be to fill up your future with that instrumental stuff if you nearly never get A B an C. You’d become just one more stupid replicator fighting for resources. You’d be better off by doing nothing and wishing that, by luck, A B an C were being instantiated by someone less instrumental than yourself.
Lefties and righties is just a convention case, if humans had three arms, two on the right, there might have been a matter of fact as to coming from which arm preference things go better.
Sure, but there are cases where rivals are evenly matched. Lions and tigers, for instance, have different—often conflicting—aims. However, it isn’t a walk-over for one team. Of course, you could say whether the lion or tiger genes win is “just a convention”—but to the lions and tigers, it really matters.
To begin with, on the limit, if you value A B and C intrinsically but you have to do D1 D2 and D3 instrumentally, you may initially think of doing D1 D2 and D3. but what use would it be to fill up your future with that instrumental stuff if you nearly never get A B an C [?]
No use. However, our values are not that far from Universal Instrumental Values—because we were built by a process involving a lot of natural selection.
Our choice is more like: do we give up a few of the things we value now—or run the risk of losing many more of them in the future. That leads to the question of how big the risk is—and that turns out to be a tricky issue.
Agreed. That tricky issue I suspect might have enormous consequences if reason ends up being highjacked by in-group out-group biases, and the surviving memes end up being those that make us more instrumental, for fear of someone else doing the same.
I expect that the force that will eventually promote natural values most strongly will be the prospect of encountering unknown aliens. As you say, the stakes are high. If we choose incorrectly, much of our distinctiveness could be permanently obliterated.
Replicator, reproducor, I can cope either way. It seems to be mostlycritics who get into a muddle over this issue—though of course, we should try not to confuse people with misleading terminology.
Lefties and righties is just a convention case, if humans had three arms, two on the right, there might have been a matter of fact as to coming from which arm preference things go better.
I think this fear of other agents taking over the world is some form of reminiscent ingroup outgroup bias. To begin with, on the limit, if you value A B and C intrinsically but you have to do D1 D2 and D3 instrumentally, you may initially think of doing D1 D2 and D3. but what use would it be to fill up your future with that instrumental stuff if you nearly never get A B an C. You’d become just one more stupid replicator fighting for resources. You’d be better off by doing nothing and wishing that, by luck, A B an C were being instantiated by someone less instrumental than yourself.
Sure, but there are cases where rivals are evenly matched. Lions and tigers, for instance, have different—often conflicting—aims. However, it isn’t a walk-over for one team. Of course, you could say whether the lion or tiger genes win is “just a convention”—but to the lions and tigers, it really matters.
No use. However, our values are not that far from Universal Instrumental Values—because we were built by a process involving a lot of natural selection.
Our choice is more like: do we give up a few of the things we value now—or run the risk of losing many more of them in the future. That leads to the question of how big the risk is—and that turns out to be a tricky issue.
Agreed. That tricky issue I suspect might have enormous consequences if reason ends up being highjacked by in-group out-group biases, and the surviving memes end up being those that make us more instrumental, for fear of someone else doing the same.
I expect that the force that will eventually promote natural values most strongly will be the prospect of encountering unknown aliens. As you say, the stakes are high. If we choose incorrectly, much of our distinctiveness could be permanently obliterated.
sorry, in your terminology I should have said “reproductor”?, I forgot your substitute for replicator.…
Replicator, reproducor, I can cope either way. It seems to be mostly critics who get into a muddle over this issue—though of course, we should try not to confuse people with misleading terminology.