timtyler comments on Ingredients of Timeless Decision Theory - Less Wrong

43 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 August 2009 01:10AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (226)
Tags: timeless timeless_decision_theory newcomblike

Comments (226)

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

Comment author: timtyler 19 August 2009 09:03:41AM *  0 points [-]

Eric Barnes - while appreciating the benefits of taking one box - has harsh words for the "taking one box is rational" folk.

I go on to claim that although the ideal strategy is to adopt a necessitating disposition to take only one box, it is never rational to choose only one box. I defend my answer against the alternative analysis of the paradox provided by David Gauthier, and I conclude that his understanding of the orthodox theory of rationality is mistaken.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 August 2009 09:14:02PM *  4 points [-]

(Sigh.)

Yes, causal decision theorists have been saying harsh words against the winners on Newcomb's Problem since the dawn of causal decision theory. I am replying to them.

Comment author: timtyler 26 June 2011 07:35:30PM -1 points [-]

Yes, causal decision theorists have been saying harsh words against the winners on Newcomb's Problem since the dawn of causal decision theory. I am replying to them.

Note that this is the same guy who says:

that rational agents will usually take only one box because they have rationally adopted the disposition to do so.

He's drawing a distinction between a "rational action" and the actions of a "rational agent".

Comment author: SilasBarta 22 August 2009 10:35:38PM 2 points [-]

Newcomb's Problem capriciously rewards irrational people in the same way that reality capriciously rewards people who irrationally believe their choices matter.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit