billswift comments on A note on hypotheticals - Less Wrong

19 Post author: PhilGoetz 07 August 2009 06:56PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (17)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: billswift 07 August 2009 08:15:18PM 2 points [-]

Hypotheticals are not necessarily untrue, much less impossible. Nor are all hypotheticals, even the ones that are impossible, counterfactuals - see his brief mention of implication.

Comment author: Dagon 07 August 2009 08:42:25PM *  1 point [-]

I think delving into the difference between untrue and impossible would help here. In a model which contains rules distinct from state, "untrue" means "same rules, different state" (usually a state that's not obtainable from the current state and rules). "impossible" means "unsustainable under the rules".

That distinction between rules and state is only in our minds/models, though. In the actual universe, if there is such a distinction to an outside observer, it's lost to those of us stuck in it, because we can effect neither portion of reality.

note: I'm saying this more confidently than I feel. I would deeply appreciate pointers to any evidence that the universe has rules and state which are somehow alterable separately.

As to "hypothetical" vs "counterfactual", you're right that this isn't a blanket synonym. There are hypotheticals that have unknown truth value rather than being known falsehoods. For purposes of this discussion, and for most interesting thought experiment, the hypothetical situation given is simply false - it does not exist as described in the universe.

Comment author: CaptainOblivious 08 August 2009 01:20:06PM 0 points [-]

That distinction between rules and state is only in our minds/models, though. In the actual universe, if there is such a distinction to an outside observer, it's lost to those of us stuck in it, because we can effect neither portion of reality.

I don't know if I agree - it seems to me that our ability to effect changes to one, but not the other, is precisely what defines the difference!

For example, my state is not "standing in the front yard", though it could be. I could easily make it so. However, there's a rule against "floating 10 feet up in the front yard without the aid of platforms or balloons, etc"... and I know this is a rule, not a state, precisely because I cannot float!

Comment author: billswift 07 August 2009 09:46:50PM 0 points [-]

I think the most interesting hypotheticals are those we do not yet know whether or not they hold.

Untrue means it is not factual, though it could have been in the past or the future or in another location. Impossible means it could not occur in out universe (at least we do not think it could occur given our current understanding of our universe).