When dealing with your future self there’s an economic balancing act at play, because Future Self’s values will inevitable shift. On the extreme side, if Omega had told Aurini′1989 that if he saves his $10 for ten years, it will grow to the point where he can buy every Ninja Turtle action figure out there, Aurini′1989 would have said, “Yes, but Aurini′1999 won’t want Ninja Turtles anymore—however, he will likely value the memory of having played with Ninja Turtles.” To hold the Future Self completely hostage to the desires of the present makes as little sense as holding the Present Self hostage to the desires of the future.
It breaks down to a tactical problem (which units do you build first in Civ 4?); I’m glad I spent money on that beer five years ago, because I still find value in the memory. What makes the problem difficult to solve is our fuzzy perceptions. First there’s the issue of scope intensity; none of our senses are calibrated, including our sense of time. But there’s also the issue of inconsistency of self. The 8 AM self which desires to be left alone to drink his coffee and read a book is a wildly different person than the 10 PM self hopped up on whiskey and telling the bartender how it really is.
The first problem is easy enough to correct for, you don’t even need to be trained in rationality to accomplish this. Most people, if given the offer X period of suffering for Y period of benefit, will be able to make a cost/benefit analysis as to whether it is a good deal or not.* Aurini′2001 made this calculation when he joined the army. The numbers are fuzzy, but they’re not inestimable. Furthermore, statistical studies (such as education level vs long-term earnings) can be used to bolster these calculations.
The real nut of the problem is the inconsistentcy of the self. We are wildly different people from moment to moment, regardless of a relatively consistent average over time. We are our values (apologies—I can’t find who wrote the original post on this topic). We all have a number of ad hoc techniques we use to stay true to our primary goals, but I’m not sure what the broader solution would be.
I guess what I’m saying is that it isn’t so much irrationality that causes you to stay up all night reading, instead of getting a good night’s sleep. When we consider choices that aren’t immediate, most people can make accurate judgements based upon the information they have. The bigger problem is how rapidly our values shift on minutiae. It’s not just that the morning is relatively further away from now, than one month vs a month and a day—the bigger problem is that there’s more personal variance between those times.
*Regarding the googleplex of dust motes vs a lifetime of torture dilemma: I think the scope intensity fail which occurred there is because a lifetime of torture could reasonably be expected to destroy the self; if it had been a week of torture, most people would volunteer, I think. It was an inability to empathize with a googleplex as opposed to an individual.
Am I allowed to play my own devil’s advocate? Autodevil’s advocate, if you will (writing down my ideas often helps me criticize them).
Aurini¹’s premise: Short term examples of Akrasia are due primarily to variability of self. Self¹ and Self² are both pursuing their own interests in a rational manner, it’s just that their interests are dissonant.
I still think this is largely the case; most instances of regret are either “Knowing what I know now, I wish I hadn’t put all my money in Enron,” ie “I based my choices on incorrect data,”; or the other possibility, “I wish I hadn’t done that last night, but if you press me, I’ll admit that I plan to do it again tonight,” the second may be foolish, it may be hypocritical, but it’s not Akrasia per se, because the regret is temporary, not existential.
There is a third type, however, which is distinctly counter-rational. Well need an example: getting drunk the night before, and failing to show up to traffic court (thus defaulting on an $X00.00 fine which you could have avoided). All Self(x) where (xn) agree that this was a poor choice. While there are substantial differences of Self over time, and this does not denote irrationality, the stark aberration which is Self(n) does.
So how do we start to explain this? On personal reflection, any time I’ve pulled a Self(n), it starts out subtly. “I’m stressed out about court tomorrow,” becomes “I’m going to have a drink to calm down,” becomes “Well that one tasted like three more,” becomes, “The hell with the world an their stupid laws! I’m going to drink the whole bottle!”
What we’ve got here is a positive feedback cycle. On the one hand, we can use the ex-alcoholics strategy of moving to a booze-free town, and try to avoid the downward spiral, but I worry that there’s always a new spiral waiting up ahead, one you can’t predict and avoid. Better, perhaps, would be by identifying and labelling the Akrasia Spiral, being aware of it, and learning to cut it off before it begins.
This reminds me of a webcomic, where the author justifies his lack of self improvement, and his continual sucking at life:
“Pfft. I’ll let Future Scott deal with it. That guy’s a dick!”
http://kol.coldfront.net/comic/ (No perma-link; it’s comic 192, if new one’s been posted since I wrote this.)
When dealing with your future self there’s an economic balancing act at play, because Future Self’s values will inevitable shift. On the extreme side, if Omega had told Aurini′1989 that if he saves his $10 for ten years, it will grow to the point where he can buy every Ninja Turtle action figure out there, Aurini′1989 would have said, “Yes, but Aurini′1999 won’t want Ninja Turtles anymore—however, he will likely value the memory of having played with Ninja Turtles.” To hold the Future Self completely hostage to the desires of the present makes as little sense as holding the Present Self hostage to the desires of the future.
It breaks down to a tactical problem (which units do you build first in Civ 4?); I’m glad I spent money on that beer five years ago, because I still find value in the memory. What makes the problem difficult to solve is our fuzzy perceptions. First there’s the issue of scope intensity; none of our senses are calibrated, including our sense of time. But there’s also the issue of inconsistency of self. The 8 AM self which desires to be left alone to drink his coffee and read a book is a wildly different person than the 10 PM self hopped up on whiskey and telling the bartender how it really is.
The first problem is easy enough to correct for, you don’t even need to be trained in rationality to accomplish this. Most people, if given the offer X period of suffering for Y period of benefit, will be able to make a cost/benefit analysis as to whether it is a good deal or not.* Aurini′2001 made this calculation when he joined the army. The numbers are fuzzy, but they’re not inestimable. Furthermore, statistical studies (such as education level vs long-term earnings) can be used to bolster these calculations.
The real nut of the problem is the inconsistentcy of the self. We are wildly different people from moment to moment, regardless of a relatively consistent average over time. We are our values (apologies—I can’t find who wrote the original post on this topic). We all have a number of ad hoc techniques we use to stay true to our primary goals, but I’m not sure what the broader solution would be.
I guess what I’m saying is that it isn’t so much irrationality that causes you to stay up all night reading, instead of getting a good night’s sleep. When we consider choices that aren’t immediate, most people can make accurate judgements based upon the information they have. The bigger problem is how rapidly our values shift on minutiae. It’s not just that the morning is relatively further away from now, than one month vs a month and a day—the bigger problem is that there’s more personal variance between those times.
*Regarding the googleplex of dust motes vs a lifetime of torture dilemma: I think the scope intensity fail which occurred there is because a lifetime of torture could reasonably be expected to destroy the self; if it had been a week of torture, most people would volunteer, I think. It was an inability to empathize with a googleplex as opposed to an individual.
Am I allowed to play my own devil’s advocate? Autodevil’s advocate, if you will (writing down my ideas often helps me criticize them).
Aurini¹’s premise: Short term examples of Akrasia are due primarily to variability of self. Self¹ and Self² are both pursuing their own interests in a rational manner, it’s just that their interests are dissonant.
I still think this is largely the case; most instances of regret are either “Knowing what I know now, I wish I hadn’t put all my money in Enron,” ie “I based my choices on incorrect data,”; or the other possibility, “I wish I hadn’t done that last night, but if you press me, I’ll admit that I plan to do it again tonight,” the second may be foolish, it may be hypocritical, but it’s not Akrasia per se, because the regret is temporary, not existential.
There is a third type, however, which is distinctly counter-rational. Well need an example: getting drunk the night before, and failing to show up to traffic court (thus defaulting on an $X00.00 fine which you could have avoided). All Self(x) where (xn) agree that this was a poor choice. While there are substantial differences of Self over time, and this does not denote irrationality, the stark aberration which is Self(n) does.
So how do we start to explain this? On personal reflection, any time I’ve pulled a Self(n), it starts out subtly. “I’m stressed out about court tomorrow,” becomes “I’m going to have a drink to calm down,” becomes “Well that one tasted like three more,” becomes, “The hell with the world an their stupid laws! I’m going to drink the whole bottle!”
What we’ve got here is a positive feedback cycle. On the one hand, we can use the ex-alcoholics strategy of moving to a booze-free town, and try to avoid the downward spiral, but I worry that there’s always a new spiral waiting up ahead, one you can’t predict and avoid. Better, perhaps, would be by identifying and labelling the Akrasia Spiral, being aware of it, and learning to cut it off before it begins.
Easier said than done, mind you.
While we’re linking to webcomic strips, Miscellanea 2007-11-19 is also quite relevant to this.
What’s wrong with the link http://kol.coldfront.net/comic/index.php?strip_id=188 or http://kol.coldfront.net/comic/istrip_files/strips/20090127.gif ?
(Also: what the heck sort of comic numbering system puts comic #192 at ID #188?)
Did you just ninja me?
The type of comic written by someone who has no interest in self improvement. :)
If I knew what ninja meant, perhaps I could answer that.
You found a permanlink, while I couldst not.
Wow, looks like their efforts to defeat permalinking were more thorough than we thought. This link now works:
http://kol.coldfront.net/comic/index.php?strip_id=192
Insulting my future self like that sure makes me less anxious about providing for my future self.
Discounting your future yourself (e.g. thinking your future self is a dick) can be a strategy to work more efficiently now.