= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
bgrah449 comments on Any sufficiently advanced wisdom is indistinguishable from bullshit - 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 (37)
If this were true, it would mean that any advanced wisdom distinguishable from bullshit is insufficiently advanced. I don't think that's true.
Some caveats to this comment:
1) Not my original insight; this is a paraphrase of Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law.
2) The original's "sufficiently advanced" and the corollary's "insufficiently advanced" don't seem to be answering the same "sufficient for what?"
Agreed. My best guess for correcting the statement is something like "any wisdom separated by a sufficiently large inferential distance from my current state is indistinguishable from bullshit," which might be closer to the truth (though I still wonder whether if its really a monotone function from inferential distance to understandability).
Well said.