2.1 Post summary / Table of contents

Part of the Valence series.

The previous post explained what I mean by the term “valence”. Now in Post 2, I’ll discuss the central role of valence in the “normative” domain of desires, preferences, values, and so on. In case you’re wondering, there is also a relation between valence and the “positive” domain of beliefs, expectations, etc.—but we’ll get to that in Post 3.

The role of valence in the normative domain can scarcely be overstated: I think valence is the very substance out of which all normativity is built.

To be clear, that does not mean that, once we understand how valence works, we understand absolutely everything there is to know about the whole normative universe. By analogy, “atoms are the very substance out of which all bacteria are built”; but if you want to understand bacteria, it's not enough [...]

---

Outline:

(00:05) 2.1 Post summary / Table of contents

(03:45) 2.2 The (misleading) intuition that valence is an attribute of real-world things

(05:40) 2.3 Situations where valence corresponds directly to a meaningful (albeit snap) normative assessment: The valence of plans, actions, and imagined futures

(08:59) 2.3.1 More on wanting or not-wanting a future situation to happen

(11:24) 2.3.2 More on “snap” assessments versus thoughtful ones

(12:51) 2.4 The valence of concepts

(13:25) 2.4.1 Side note: Valence as a (roughly) linear function over compositional thought-pieces

(14:52) 2.4.1.1 (Apparent) counterexamples to linearity

(16:50) 2.4.2 The valence of a concept cannot be interpreted as a meaningful normative assessment

(20:30) 2.4.3 The valence of a concept is really a learned normative heuristic

(22:21) 2.4.4 Making sense of vibes-based “meaningless arguments”

(25:25) 2.4.5 Should we be “anti-” normative heuristics in general?

(30:13) 2.5 How does valence get set and adjusted?

(34:16) 2.5.1 Special case: Things that go together tend to acquire similar valence

(35:25) 2.6 Valence of metacognitive and self-reflective thoughts: ego-syntonic vs -dystonic ideas, professed “values”, etc.

(38:50) 2.6.1 What are “values”?

(40:31) 2.7 Moral reasoning

(40:35) 2.7.1 A descriptive account

(44:19) 2.7.2 Implications for the “true nature of morality” (if any)

(48:02) 2.7.3 Possible implications for AI alignment discourse

(50:21) 2.8 Conclusion

The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
December 7th, 2023

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SqgRtCwueovvwxpDQ/valence-series-2-valence-and-normativity

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“[Valence series] 2. Valence & Normativity” by Steven Byrnes

LessWrong (30+ Karma)