= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jonathan_Graehl comments on A note on hypotheticals - 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 (17)
I try to respond to fantasy scenarios in the spirit of the least convenient possible world, but I appreciate it when the author of a scenario spells out the intended dilemma explicitly, or else proofs it against tempting escapes.
An analogy or hypothetical will subtract value If it causes enough distraction. They are dangerously powerful communication, and practically necessary, even though ideally we can just create notation for the actual problem, and reason using that.
That's a clever point. Maybe there are two uses for an analogy, then: (1) to reason informally (performing a logical argument using natural, more familiar, language). This could (and I think, should) be done formally whenever possible. and (2) the use as an "intuition pump" (word from Dennett, I think) where the point is to provide a tangible analogy to your model, enabling someone to "understand" you, but not necessarily proving anything.