Highlights From The Comments On The Repugnant Conclusion And WWOTF

...

(Original post here) 1: Petey writes: When I think of happiness 0.01, I don't think of someone on the edge of suicide. I shudder at the thought of living the sorts of lives the vast majority of people have lived historically, yet almost all of them have wanted and tried to prolong their lives. Given how evolution shaped us, it makes sense that we are wired to care about our survival and hope for things to be better, even under great duress. So a suicidal person would have a happiness level well under 0, probably for an extended period of time. If you think of a person with 0.01 happiness…

related reading

• The Lifespan Dilemma — LessWronglesswrong.com
• Prolegomena to a Theory of Fun — LessWronglesswrong.com
• ⚡️ Towards Ineffective Altruismreboothq.substack.com
• Why I am not a longtermist – Windows On Theorywindowsontheory.org
• The Repugnant Conclusion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)plato.stanford.edu
• More People Means More Goodetiennefd.substack.com
• Against neutrality about creating happy lives - Joe Carlsmithjoecarlsmith.com
• Point-by-point critique of Ord’s “Why I’m Not a Negative Utilitarian”centerforreducingsuffering.org
• The Saturation Viewforethought.org
• Suicidal Compassion: How Utilitarianism at AI Companies Endangers Humanityai-frontiers.org
• The Fun Theory Sequence — LessWronglesswrong.com
• On infinite ethics - Joe Carlsmithjoecarlsmith.com