And here I looked at that and saw a negative example of how not to do “shut up and multiply”, though I suppose it could also be a warning about scope insensitivity / psychophysical numbing if the risk at hand required an absolute payment to stave off, rather than a per-capita payment, since in the former case only absolute numbers matter, and in the latter case per capita risks matter.
Maybe I need to include more context. This conversation occurs after the multiplication was done. This was discussing the aftermath, which had been minimized as much as the minds in question could manage. I took it to mean that, once you have made the best decision you can, there is no guarantee that you will be happy with the outcome, just that it would likely have been worse had you made any other decision.
I think the inability to include that context and make your interpretation clear means that it’s a bad rationality quote because it’s far too easily taken a ‘consequentialism boo!’ quote.
“Did many people die?”
“Three thousand four hundred and ninety-two.”
“A small proportion.”
“It is always one hundred percent for the individual concerned.”
“Still...”
“No, no still.”
-Ian Banks, Look to Windward
Does this quote have any rationalist content beyond the usual anti-deathism applause light?
And here I looked at that and saw a negative example of how not to do “shut up and multiply”, though I suppose it could also be a warning about scope insensitivity / psychophysical numbing if the risk at hand required an absolute payment to stave off, rather than a per-capita payment, since in the former case only absolute numbers matter, and in the latter case per capita risks matter.
Maybe I need to include more context. This conversation occurs after the multiplication was done. This was discussing the aftermath, which had been minimized as much as the minds in question could manage. I took it to mean that, once you have made the best decision you can, there is no guarantee that you will be happy with the outcome, just that it would likely have been worse had you made any other decision.
I think the inability to include that context and make your interpretation clear means that it’s a bad rationality quote because it’s far too easily taken a ‘consequentialism boo!’ quote.