The essay you link is pretty unconvincing to me. But even if I grant what Eliezer says there, I’m not sure how it applies to Bart’s thought experiment. I can see the argument that the indefinite extension of human lifespans is just a natural extension of uncontroversial humanism (even though I disagree with the argument). We’d all agree that it would be a good thing to extend lifespans by 10 years, so why not 500 or a a million? A good ethical theory shouldn’t build in arbitrary thresholds.
I don’t see the analogous argument for Bart’s thought experiment. Why is reviving people who are already dead (many of whom have been dead for long enough that they do not have any living acquaintances who mourn their passing) a natural extension of humanism? Could you explain why you think Eliezer’s essay is relevant to Bart’s question?
If you value life over death, then choosing to leave people dead when you could restore their life seems like an exception to me.
(many of whom have been dead for long enough that they do not have any living acquaintances who mourn their passing)
If we revive only those who are mourned by the currently living, those newly currently living people we just revived will mourn others. After some amount of iterations, we will have revived everybody.
The essay you link is pretty unconvincing to me. But even if I grant what Eliezer says there, I’m not sure how it applies to Bart’s thought experiment. I can see the argument that the indefinite extension of human lifespans is just a natural extension of uncontroversial humanism (even though I disagree with the argument). We’d all agree that it would be a good thing to extend lifespans by 10 years, so why not 500 or a a million? A good ethical theory shouldn’t build in arbitrary thresholds.
I don’t see the analogous argument for Bart’s thought experiment. Why is reviving people who are already dead (many of whom have been dead for long enough that they do not have any living acquaintances who mourn their passing) a natural extension of humanism? Could you explain why you think Eliezer’s essay is relevant to Bart’s question?
If you value life over death, then choosing to leave people dead when you could restore their life seems like an exception to me.
If we revive only those who are mourned by the currently living, those newly currently living people we just revived will mourn others. After some amount of iterations, we will have revived everybody.