PhilGoetz comments on Anticipation vs. Faith: At What Cost Rationality? - Less Wrong

8 Post author: Wei_Dai 13 October 2009 12:10AM

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

Comments (105)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 13 October 2009 01:13:16AM 17 points [-]

You have to have a core of arational desires/goals/values. Otherwise, you're just a logic engine with nothing to prove.

Comment author: hegemonicon 13 October 2009 02:28:29PM *  7 points [-]

Upvoted. To extend Eliezer's favorite metaphor, rationality makes it easy to get where you're going by making the map closely match the territory, but merely having a good map won't tell you where you want to go.

Comment author: UnholySmoke 15 October 2009 12:56:33PM 3 points [-]

Also upvoted, and very succintly put.

Rationality is a tool we use get to our terminal value. And what do we do when that tool tells us our terminal value is irrational?

Never ask that question.

Comment author: DanArmak 13 October 2009 04:12:02PM *  2 points [-]

I agree, and I think that pretty much answers the post's question:

What would you do if true rationality requires giving up something even more fundamental to the human experience than faith?

"True rationality" is, pretty much by definition, the best way of achieving your goals. The above question should be written as: do you have goals that are so important, that you would agree to give up something fundamental to the human experience to achieve them?

My personal answer is: mine only such goals are of the form "do not undergo a huge amount of torture/suffering".