= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MichaelBishop comments on Rationality Quotes - June 2009 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (168)
The whole point of saying "ceteris paribus" or "all else equal," is precisely that all else is not everyone will agree that all else is equal. In other words, saying "all else equal" implies "there may be other factors which matter."
In cases you are curious, those factors include: length, literal meaning, eloquence, humor, trustworthiness of author, wisdom of author, context in which it was written, persuasiveness, memorability, and more.
Writing "ceteris paribus" or "all else equal" is useful when it increases the precision of a statement.
I guess I can't imagine how two quotes could exist such that, if I could score them (on whatever attributes I find valuable in quote-space), they would come out equal enough that I would prefer one over the other based on the originator of the quote. I think this is due to the way I think of quotes, as unique things (i.e., apples and oranges. One could say, "I prefer fruit grown by a well-pedigreed gardener, all else being equal," and it would (possibly) be true for lots of people. But it doesn't really tell us what kind of fruit you like, assuming poorly-pedigreed gardeners have a non-zero chance of growing good fruit).
It could also be interpreted as a failure of my imagination, I'm sure.