I got that impression as well. And to be honest, I haven’t ever seen a good argument for why CEV has any fixed points in morality-space. Or rather, if fixed points exist, it’s not immediately obvious to me why two distinct CEV-flows couldn’t result in mutually irreconcilable value systems.
Which is why Sam’s argument isn’t super convincing to me.
It seems like he’s groping towards the concept of CEV?
I got that impression as well. And to be honest, I haven’t ever seen a good argument for why CEV has any fixed points in morality-space. Or rather, if fixed points exist, it’s not immediately obvious to me why two distinct CEV-flows couldn’t result in mutually irreconcilable value systems.
Which is why Sam’s argument isn’t super convincing to me.
Harris’s semantics would say that the human CEV is probably good while the alien CEV is something else.
Harris’s semantics are actually somewhat similar to Eliezer’s, actually.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/fv3/by_which_it_may_be_judged/
I think he’s essentially arguing that for any given set of minds, some CEV must exist. I do think he’s somewhat confused in getting there though.