“UIVs are the unique set of values X such that in order to achieve any other value Y, you first have to do X.”
Roko,
You know that all of the so-called ‘UIVs’ that have been postulated only apply for some Y under some conditions (the presence of other powerful agents and game theoretic considerations or manipulation, self-referential utility functions, preferences over mathematical truths, and many other considerations make so-called UIVs useless or sources of terminal disvalue for an infinite number of cases), and an agent could have the terminal value Y1, where Y1 is not valuing anything in X, so X is an empty set.
Why are ‘often instrumental values,’ or OIVs, non-arbitrary terminal values as well?
Roko,
“UIVs are the unique set of values X such that in order to achieve any other value Y, you first have to do X.” Roko,
You know that all of the so-called ‘UIVs’ that have been postulated only apply for some Y under some conditions (the presence of other powerful agents and game theoretic considerations or manipulation, self-referential utility functions, preferences over mathematical truths, and many other considerations make so-called UIVs useless or sources of terminal disvalue for an infinite number of cases), and an agent could have the terminal value Y1, where Y1 is not valuing anything in X, so X is an empty set.
Why are ‘often instrumental values,’ or OIVs, non-arbitrary terminal values as well?