Transformative Experience, Rational Decision Making, and L.A. Paul's Vampire Offer

[durangodawood]

A vegetarian would not drink the blood of any animal humanely farmed or not. Poor scenario inventing when it contradicts itself. All that is needed to fix it is to change vegetarian to non cannibalistic. Then it doesn't even matter how the animals are farmed as long as humans are not included.
As to the question, a leap of faith is always necessary to take a life altering decision without experience. However, if one is dissatisfied with the results one can alter one's life once again as often as necessary.

They are animal-tarian vampires.

Yes. Humans are animals too etc etc.....

 

[durangodawood]

...What are your thoughts? Do you see a way around this idea that there is no real way to make a rational choice when it comes to transformative experiences? What is the value of other's testimony when it comes to such decisions? What has been your experience with life transforming decisions?.

"all of your friends and family members have already become vampires. They tell you, "It is amazing. It is the best thing ever."

All your friends and family give their experience positive reviews? I dont see how one could rationally argue against becoming a vampire if thats the case.

 

[public hermit]

All your friends and family give their experience positive reviews? I dont see how one could rationally argue against becoming a vampire if thats the case.

Haha, that's so true.

 

[muichimotsu]

"all of your friends and family members have already become vampires. They tell you, "It is amazing. It is the best thing ever."

All your friends and family give their experience positive reviews? I dont see how one could rationally argue against becoming a vampire if thats the case.

I mean, someone can tell me they really like smoking and drinking, that doesn't mean I should do that. I'm thinking of Togusa in Ghost in the Shell, who doesn't have any cybernetic enhancements in a world where it's commonplace. Vampirism could have appeals, but in the same vein as in fantasy or superhero settings, those who don't have powers are still valuable in being able to contribute in contexts where those who are dependent on magic and such can't

 

[durangodawood]

I mean, someone can tell me they really like smoking and drinking, that doesn't mean I should do that. I'm thinking of Togusa in Ghost in the Shell, who doesn't have any cybernetic enhancements in a world where it's commonplace. Vampirism could have appeals, but in the same vein as in fantasy or superhero settings, those who don't have powers are still valuable in being able to contribute in contexts where those who are dependent on magic and such can't

There a LOT more context where you can contribute if youre immortal rather than dying at 80.

 

[grasping the after wind]

"all of your friends and family members have already become vampires. They tell you, "It is amazing. It is the best thing ever."

All your friends and family give their experience positive reviews? I dont see how one could rationally argue against becoming a vampire if thats the case.

All of your friends and family members have become heroine addicts they tell you "It is amazing . It is the best thing ever." .

 

[durangodawood]

All of your friends and family members have become heroine addicts they tell you "It is amazing . It is the best thing ever." .

From what I know of my friends, family, and heroin.... thats not a possible scenario.

 

[grasping the after wind]

From what I know of my friends, family, and heroin.... thats not a possible scenario.

But them being vampires is?

 

[durangodawood]

But them being vampires is?

Well for the sake of the thought experiment we're stipulating that its possible.

With heroin, I already know enough to know that my people would have to be basically unrecognizable to me if they thought heroin was great. In other words, they wouldnt really be my people.

But with being-vampire.... I have no reference for what that would be like. Maybe the real people I know would recommend it.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Well for the sake of the thought experiment we're stipulating that its possible.

With heroin, I already know enough to know that my people would have to be basically unrecognizable to me if they thought heroin was great. In other words, they wouldnt really be my people.

But with being-vampire.... I have no reference for what that would be like. Maybe the real people I know would recommend it.

For the sake of the thought experiment I posited what I did in response to your assertion that if everyone you knew approved of something then they surely must be correct. Everyone I know drinks coffee and each one of them tells me how wonderful it is. I tasted it. They are all wrong. In addition if one lives in what amounts to an echo chamber, one will likely hear 100% agreement upon things even when not 100% of those involves do in reality agree. This is because the percentage that would disagree are afraid of being ostracized if they do not remain in agreement with the consensus opinion.

 

[durangodawood]

For the sake of the thought experiment I posited what I did in response to your assertion that if everyone you knew approved of something then they surely must be correct. Everyone I know drinks coffee and each one of them tells me how wonderful it is. I tasted it. They are all wrong. In addition if one lives in what amounts to an echo chamber, one will likely hear 100% agreement upon things even when not 100% of those involves do in reality agree. This is because the percentage that would disagree are afraid of being ostracized if they do not remain in agreement with the consensus opinion.

Before you tried coffee it would be fair to say the odds of you liking it were very high if all your friends and family did too. But its not 100% certain, of course.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Before you tried coffee it would be fair to say the odds of you liking it were very high if all your friends and family did too. But its not 100% certain, of course.

No The odds of being wrong about my reaction to coffee were what would have been very high.

 

[public hermit]

My original post didn't give Paul's account of rationality. As she puts it, in real life cases that are similar to the vampire offer, we are unable to achieve the "epistemic gold standard" when it comes to rationality. What aspect of rationality are we missing in these case? From an interview of L.A. Paul in a recent issue of New Philosopher:

"So... there are lots of different ways of making decisions, we make them rationally in different ways. But when we're thinking about what can sometimes be described as 'forecasting', in other words when we're trying to imagine different possibilities for ourselves and then construct a model of how that possibility would be and then assign features of that model value in order to try to determine whether that has value. What we often do is simulate ourselves in that situation and then assess its positive or negative character...The idea is, very roughly, that when you look at different possibilities for yourself and your beliefs are reasonably developed, then you assign values to these different possibilities and compare them to see which way of choosing, which model you want to bring, maximizes the expected value for yourself; which action is most likely to bring about the highest level of satisfaction. I think when we're talking about practical decision-making, especially with big life decisions, it's kind that of assessment that can become very salient when you're making a choice like, Do I want to become a vampire? Do I want to become a parent? Do I want to emigrate to Australia?

The thought is that if you perform this task rationally then you choose the action that's going to maximize the expected value-you choose the model that's likely to bring about the greatest increase in life satisfaction or wellbeing. To do otherwise is not rational-that's the idea. So, the problem in the case I was describing, and I think it applies to real-life cases, is that if you're going to develop a model, if you're going to construct a representation that you need to assess for value, then you have to have the ability, in a sense, to color in all the features of it...That's really a way of seeing what the problem is: if the model is not fully defined in the relevant way, then you're just not able to assess the expected value in a way that's going to allow you to make a comparison-an informed and accurate one" (New Philosopher #26: Change).

(subscription needed)
Issue #026: Change | New Philosopher

 

[durangodawood]

No The odds of being wrong about my reaction to coffee were what would have been very high.

Say what?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Say what?

You claimed the odds were good I would like coffee based upon the dubious criterion that other people I knew who all liked coffee all me I would like it. That would be like asking 49er fans who would win the Super Bowl and ignoring Chiefs fans altogether. The fact is that I hate it passionately. And the 49ers lost. There was never any reason to bet that I would like it based upon your flimsy criterion. A good oddsmaker would have done more research and have gauged the odds much better arriving at the correct conclusion that I would not like coffee and making a ;lot of money betting with my friends .

 

[public hermit]

Another problem Paul brings up, as concerns rationality in these kinds of decision making processes, is the one on whose behalf I am making the choice. If it is a life transforming decision, it seems I should be making it on behalf the preferences of who I will become then, and not based on my preferences now. But, of course, I have no way of knowing what my preferences will be then. This, she thinks, is a paradox that also keeps us from being able to make a rational, informed choice.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Another problem Paul brings up, as concerns rationality in these kinds of decision making processes, is the one on whose behalf I am making the choice. If it is a life transforming decision, it seems I should be making it on behalf the preferences of who I will become then, and not based on my preferences now. But, of course, I have no way of knowing what my preferences will be then. This, she thinks, is a paradox that also keeps us from being able to make a rational, informed choice.

I disagree. One always makes life altering decisions on behalf of the person that is going to make the decision and that is proper. The one making the decision is obviously looking for something and the one that made the decision may be looking for something else altogether.

 

[durangodawood]

You claimed the odds were good I would like coffee based upon the dubious criterion that other people I knew who all liked coffee all me I would like it. That would be like asking 49er fans who would win the Super Bowl and ignoring Chiefs fans altogether. The fact is that I hate it passionately. And the 49ers lost. There was never any reason to bet that I would like it based upon your flimsy criterion. A good oddsmaker would have done more research and have gauged the odds much better arriving at the correct conclusion that I would not like coffee and making a ;lot of money betting with my friends .

Its very rare that every single person one knows well all agree on something. When that occurs, the odds are extremely good you'll agree too.

Thats not a dubious criterion. Its a very reliable one.

Now one could avoid probability altogether and just go find out for sure. But thats not what we're talking about.

 

[public hermit]

The one making the decision is obviously looking for something and the one that made the decision may be looking for something else altogether.

Exactly. Would you want your 15 year old self deciding for you today, or would you want your current self to decide for you today? You would want your current self to decide for you today. When we are making life transforming choices, we are deciding on the behalf of who we will be. But, we cannot know the preferences of who we will be.

It's like Derek Parfit's "Russian Nobleman" who inherits a large sum of money, happens to be a socialist, wants to eventually give it all away, but doesn't trust his future self to fulfill his wishes.

 

[durangodawood]

....When we are making life transforming choices, we are deciding on the behalf of who we will be.....

Not sure there is a person-who-we-will-be on whos behalf we do anything. Where is he?

I think its more like we are building this person as we go along with the choices we make.