‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

One-Electron Universe

117 points · 94 comments · pella

  1. stared · · focus · HN ↗
    In the line, I recommend „The Egg” by Andy Weir <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.galactanet.com&#x2F;oneoff&#x2F;theegg_mod.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.galactanet.com&#x2F;oneoff&#x2F;theegg_mod.html
    1. ndarray · · focus · HN ↗
      Engage in the thought experiment that you are&#x2F;were&#x2F;will be every human for a sec. Is self-harm morally ok? Many would say yes. So &quot;the egg&quot; already gives those people a pass to hurt everyone else in this world because it&#x27;s a form of self-harm. Great. Now for those who explicitly don&#x27;t want to self-harm. &quot;The egg&quot; implies that your rebirths happen serially in meta-time. You live this life, then the next, then another,... those lives may overlap on earth, but in egg-time, they don&#x27;t. This means you can statistically expect you&#x27;ve already lived 50% of them. There&#x27;s no guarantee of this, but the distribution is normal, not uniform [1] (similar reasoning found in doomsday argument [2]). 50%, give or take, humans out there you&#x27;ve already been. Everything you do to them, you do to your PAST self. You&#x27;re not only absolved of moral accountability, but also of the physical consequences of treating them horribly. So while &quot;the egg&quot; tries to do the opposite, it really seems to justify psycho maxxing.

      [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Central_limit_theorem" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Central_limit_theorem

      [2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Doomsday_argument" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Doomsday_argument

      1. pstuart · · focus · HN ↗
        &gt; Is self-harm morally ok?

        Is self-harm ok? What could be considered good about it?

        1. ndarray · · focus · HN ↗
          I probably should have phrased it &quot;do you have a moral right to self-harm&quot;? The starting point is usually that you&#x27;re allowed to do anything you want, total freedom, and then we blacklist everything we deem immoral. You don&#x27;t have an explicit license to breathe either, it&#x27;s just not blacklisted, not by your gov, nor morally. As far as I can tell, many people refuse to morally blacklist self-harm, because there&#x27;s no victim other than the perpetrator. This is doubly true in the egg scenario where you are also everyone who suffers any secondary harm from the self-harm, like also being every saddened family member. To make a long story short, I&#x27;m not asking about goodness of anything here, &quot;ok&quot; just means &quot;granted.&quot;
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.