The Near/Far distinction is about more than just decisions made under duress or temptation. Far values have a strong signaling component, and they’re subject to their own biases.
Can you give an example of a bias which arises from Far values? I should say that I haven’t actually carefully read Hanson’s posts on Near vs. Far modes. In general I think that Hanson’s views of human nature are very misguided (though closer to the truth than is typical).
Okay, thanks for clarifying. I still haven’t read Robin Hanson on Near vs. Far (nor do I have much interest in doing so) but based on your characterization of Far, I would say that I believe that it’s important to strike a balance between Near vs. Far. I don’t really understand what part of my comment orthogonal is/was objecting to—maybe the issue is linguistic/semantic more than anything else.
The Near/Far distinction is about more than just decisions made under duress or temptation. Far values have a strong signaling component, and they’re subject to their own biases.
Can you give an example of a bias which arises from Far values? I should say that I haven’t actually carefully read Hanson’s posts on Near vs. Far modes. In general I think that Hanson’s views of human nature are very misguided (though closer to the truth than is typical).
Willingness to wreck people’s lives (usually but not always other people’s) for the sake of values which may or may not be well thought out.
This is partly a matter of the signaling aspect, and partly because, since Far values are Far, you’re less likely to be accurate about them.
Okay, thanks for clarifying. I still haven’t read Robin Hanson on Near vs. Far (nor do I have much interest in doing so) but based on your characterization of Far, I would say that I believe that it’s important to strike a balance between Near vs. Far. I don’t really understand what part of my comment orthogonal is/was objecting to—maybe the issue is linguistic/semantic more than anything else.