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-l...@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
