I suspect I’m not well-versed in the overall debate you’re participating in—do you have a pointer to some operational definition of “intrinsic value”, and why you think ANY of these candidates for list membership are universally understood and valued the same way among humans?
To me, there are a few different models that fit my experiences with respect to these things. In myself, the pluralist position can be reconciled that all of these things (including but not limited to happiness) contribute to my satisfaction and thriving—overall positive thoughts about my life, even when experiencing pain, sadness, or regret. Note that the weights and correlations between these things are nonlinear and change over time.
In my evaluation of others, I can’t experience their reactions and I don’t fully trust their reports of their experiences or preferences, so I’m stuck with a balance of proxy measures for “what I want for them (aka: what they SHOULD want)” and “what I want from them”. Both uncertainty and differential impact mean I overall care less about others than about myself.
The experience machine is a good thought experiment for WHY you’re adopting these evaluation frameworks. I wouldn’t knowingly choose that subset of happiness over my belief that I’m having a positive impact on other existing and future humans. That doesn’t seem at odds with prioritizing my own inclusive satisfaction which comprises all of these things.
I suspect I’m not well-versed in the overall debate you’re participating in—do you have a pointer to some operational definition of “intrinsic value”, and why you think ANY of these candidates for list membership are universally understood and valued the same way among humans?
To me, there are a few different models that fit my experiences with respect to these things. In myself, the pluralist position can be reconciled that all of these things (including but not limited to happiness) contribute to my satisfaction and thriving—overall positive thoughts about my life, even when experiencing pain, sadness, or regret. Note that the weights and correlations between these things are nonlinear and change over time.
In my evaluation of others, I can’t experience their reactions and I don’t fully trust their reports of their experiences or preferences, so I’m stuck with a balance of proxy measures for “what I want for them (aka: what they SHOULD want)” and “what I want from them”. Both uncertainty and differential impact mean I overall care less about others than about myself.
The experience machine is a good thought experiment for WHY you’re adopting these evaluation frameworks. I wouldn’t knowingly choose that subset of happiness over my belief that I’m having a positive impact on other existing and future humans. That doesn’t seem at odds with prioritizing my own inclusive satisfaction which comprises all of these things.