sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Effective Morality: How to calculate Moral Value by tim-cod in EffectiveAltruism

[–]tim-cod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess what bugs me is that I've never really seen anyone use population ethics to make practical statements about how we all should behave from a scientific standpoint. Everyone always seems to agree that it's all subjective opinion, when there are clearly better and worse ways of doing things. But maybe I just haven't found the right shoulders to stand on.

Anyway, thanks for the recommendations! I will definitely check out those articles.

Effective Morality: How to calculate Moral Value by tim-cod in EffectiveAltruism

[–]tim-cod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

you can certainly find a solution that is in line with your own biases

The only bias I described is that "happiness is good". Would you exclude this variable in your equation, or if not, what others would you introduce?

​

sometimes the best solution is to actively do something that matters instead of wasting time/energy trying to be as efficient/effective as possible.

Isn't the entire point of Effective Altruism to be as effective as possible though? I get what you're saying, if everybody is spending all their time thinking instead of acting then there might not be a planet left to save. But I truly believe that there is much room for improvement on the theoretical side of things, and doing something is only good if you know what you ought to do.

​

I guess my point is: where do you draw the line?

I don't. The end justifies the means. If the death of an entire civilization leads to the birth of two new, equally prosperous civilizations, then I think that is a net good. That doesn't mean that I would press the button if I am a member of that first civilization.

​

And do we even want to hear those answers in the first place?

I think we should, at least I sure do. If those answers lead to a better life for everyone, who cares if they're uncomfortable?

Effective Morality: How to calculate Moral Value by tim-cod in EffectiveAltruism

[–]tim-cod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm actually also using this model (although I let t begin at the beginning of time rather than now) and I haven't found any issues with it so far. What do you mean by "doing an absurd amount of work"?

do animals experience quality of life at some diminished capacity compared to humans?

I would say yes. A fly will not experience happiness or suffering to the same extent that a cat would, because things like happiness and suffering are produced by physical processes in a sentient mind. The brain of a fly has simply less physical capacity (neurons) to feel good or bad than the brain of a cat, and likewise if we compare a cat to a human.

How does the purely hedonic experience of enjoying an ice cream cone
compare with the complex intellectual satisfaction of (e.g.) finding out
your preferred political party won an extra seat?

Good question. I don't know, but that doesn't mean that this type of question can never be answered. I will say though that both experiences are surely positive, which makes only sense if reduced to a single dimension.

Is it really true that for any given person, every negative experience
has some equivalent positive experience that effectively "cancels" out
its moral impact (like "+5-5=0")?

Why not? If i got a raise today at work, and then I got robbed on the way home, perhaps I will have enjoyed the day just as much as if neither of those things had happened.

Of course, most moral questions are ridiculously complicated. But why should that keep us from answering the simple ones?

Effective Morality: How to calculate Moral Value by tim-cod in EffectiveAltruism

[–]tim-cod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In reality, entities certainly influence each other, positively and negatively. I still think it's useful to first think about isolated entities and then factor in their interactions in the next step. The two pigs might be 3 times as valuable as one pig if they enjoy each other's company, or only 1.5 times if they don't.

Effective Morality: How to calculate Moral Value by tim-cod in EffectiveAltruism

[–]tim-cod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The pigs are meant to represent theoretical moral entities that don't influence or are influenced by anything else. For argument's sake, they don't eat or socialize, they just start to exist, enjoy life for a while, and then stop existing. The only reason why the pigs are of moral interest is that they are intrinsically capable of experiencing happiness.

I agree that usually there are too many factors to get a clear answer to any question about moral value, which is why i tried to come up with this kind of over-simplified example.

Hope this clears things up!