Jack,
You say "Q_i (which is _your_ utility per unit measure for the observer i)."
This is an oxymoron. How can observer i know or care what YOUR Q
(Quality) is? How can this observer feel what it feels being you?. The
only observer that matters in evaluating your Q is you as a
self-observer. The sum is no sum at all:
U = M_o Q_o where o = you as observer.
George
Wei Dai wrote:
> Jack Mallah wrote:
>
>> They might not, but I'm sure most would; maybe not exactly that U, but a
>> lot closer to it.
>>
>
> Can you explain why you believe that?
>
>
>> No. In U = Sum_i M_i Q_i, you sum over all the i's, not just the ones
>> that are similar to you. Of course your Q_i (which is _your_ utility per
>> unit measure for the observer i) might be highly peaked around those that
>> are similar to you, but there's no need for a precise cutoff in
>> similarity. And it's even very likely that it will have even higher peaks
>> around people that are not very much like you at all (these are the people
>> that you would sacrifice yourself for).
>>
>> By contrast, in your proposal for U, you do need a precise cutoff, for
>> which there is no justification.
>>
>
> Ok, I see what you're saying, and it is a good point. But most people
> already have a personal identity that is sufficiently well-defined in the
> current environment where mind copying is not possible, so in practice
> deciding which i's to sum over isn't a serious problem (yet).
>
>
>
> >
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Mar 11 2009 - 00:20:21 PDT