And if no one donated, the street musicians would not play. Therefore, by Kantian/timeless considerations, I should donate.
This doesn’t follow. Other people do, in fact, pay street musicians. Their decision to do so is not at all related to your decision. They are not modelling your decision or executing any algorithm remotely like TDT.
Going “timeless” is orthogonal to arbitrarily being nice. TDT would not preclude making such donations but if a TDT agent did make them (in the circumstances described) it would be out of intrinsically valuing the altruistic act or some other additional nuance of it’s utility function unrelated to the “it will make me get to hear music” term.
Should I donate to street musicians or not?
Perhaps. It comes out of your “warm fuzzies” budget.
This doesn’t follow. Other people do, in fact, pay street musicians. Their decision to do so is not at all related to your decision. They are not modelling your decision or executing any algorithm remotely like TDT.
Going “timeless” is orthogonal to arbitrarily being nice. TDT would not preclude making such donations but if a TDT agent did make them (in the circumstances described) it would be out of intrinsically valuing the altruistic act or some other additional nuance of it’s utility function unrelated to the “it will make me get to hear music” term.
Perhaps. It comes out of your “warm fuzzies” budget.
Ah. Do you disagree generally with Gary Drescher’s thesis that human morality is an approximation to timeless reasoning?
Not as a decision theoretic prerogative. I do see certain parallels.