4

Well, the question is flawed because it assumes a binary distinction between "moral" and "immoral" acts. In utilitarianism, actions are more moral, or less moral, not completely moral or completely immoral in absolute terms. Morality is identified by utility, and falls on a continuum. Just for illustration purposes, suppose you have five ...


2

The important feature of an example like this is that we are being asked to find the optimal strategy for playing a multi-round game. The fundamental reason that maximizing expected value at each round does not deliver optimal value over multiple rounds is because the process in this example is not ergodic. Ergodicity refers to a property of a system whereby ...


2

According to reference here and here: Normative decision theory is concerned with identification of optimal decisions where optimality is often determined by considering an ideal decision maker who is able to calculate with perfect accuracy and is in some sense fully rational. Axiology is the philosophical study of value. It includes questions about the ...


1

Part of the problem here is that this question conflates two different senses of the term 'value': The econometric sense, which uses 'value' as a noun to indicate (an often normalized) comparative worth e.g., "Clean energy programs produce value that recovers all their initial research costs" The philosophical sense, which uses 'value' as a noun ...


1

I'm not sure if you are trying to find a justification for a decision you've already made, or if you are still open about the decision, but just a suggestion: You don't mention what your reasons are for leaning towards not having children, but from what I've read, a lot of people argue that it's a moral imperative to not have children on the idea of scarcity ...


1

Unlike what is said in another response, if, very unrealistically for real people, your utility is indeed linear in the final outcome after finitely many rounds (however many -- say T), then always betting is optimal. A quick proof that that works even if you could skip a round: It is clearly suboptimal to never bet across all T rounds; betting once would ...


1

Now is, "Do this but don't choose to do this," likewise odd, so that we "see" some connection between choice and action? The answer to this question is a very emphatic no. Both athletic psychologists and Zen practitioners believe in a state of what Zen calls no-mind or mushin. Simply put, one acts not from deliberative conscious thought, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible