Reply to: Re: Ethics
Daniel Fabulich wrote:
>If egoism is rational, then it is rational for both players; yet egoism
>would demand suboptimal consequences according to its own value system:
>the egoistic players find themselves worse off than they would have been
>otherwise.
>If we agree that rationality, at least in part, involves doing
>what is necessary in order to get the optimal consequences (where the
>"optimal" consequences is determined by one's value system) then egoism
>dictates that the way to fulfill the ends of egoism is to reject egoism;
>in other words, it is *not* rational to be an egoist, because it leaves
>the players worse off than it would be had they been utilitarians.
You're using the word "egoism" in a very simplistic manner here. In the real world, the payoff function is a very complex relationship, that includes most of the people that you know and even many that you don't (in most cases indistinguishable from a utilitarian one). On the other hand, if you're a Utilitarian, you're forcing someone else's payoff function on me. It's a nice offer, but I think I'll pass.
FELIX'98 - CITIUS . ALTIUS . FORTIUS