Nick_Tarleton comments on Open Thread: March 2010 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: AdeleneDawner 01 March 2010 09:25AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (658)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (658)

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

Comment author: MrHen 02 March 2010 04:20:09PM 2 points [-]

I don't know how to respond to this. I feel like I have addressed all of these points elsewhere in the comments.

A summary:

  • The poker game is an example. There are more examples involving things with less obvious rules.
  • My reputation matters in the sense that they know wasn't trying to cheat. As such, when pestered for an answer they are not secretly thinking, "Cheater." This should imply that they are avoiding the cheater-heuristic or are unaware that they are using the cheater-heuristic.
  • I confronted my friends and asked for a reasonable answer. Heuristics were not offered. No one complained about broken rules or cheating. They complained that they were not going to get their card.

It seems to be a problem with ownership. If this sense of ownership is based on a heuristic meant to detect cheaters or suspicious situations... okay, I can buy that. But why would someone who knows all of the probabilities involved refuse to admit that cutting the deck doesn't matter? Pride?

One more thing of note: They argued against the abstract scenario. This scenario assumed no cheating and no funny business. They still thought it mattered.

Personally, I think this is a larger issue than catching cheaters. People seemed somewhat attached to the anti-cheating heuristic. Would it be worth me typing up an addendum addressing that point in full?

Comment author: Nick_Tarleton 02 March 2010 04:25:15PM *  4 points [-]

If this sense of ownership is based on a heuristic meant to detect cheaters or suspicious situations... okay, I can buy that. But why would someone who knows all of the probabilities involved refuse to admit that cutting the deck doesn't matter? Pride? ... People seemed somewhat attached to the anti-cheating heuristic.

The System 1 suspicion-detector would be less effective if System 2 could override it, since System 2 can be manipulated.

(Another possibility may be loss aversion, making any change unattractive that guarantees a different outcome without changing the expected value. (I see hugh already mentioned this.) A third, seemingly less likely, possibility is intuitive 'belief' in the agency of the cards, which is somehow being undesirably thwarted by changing the ritual.)

Comment author: MrHen 02 March 2010 04:49:56PM 0 points [-]

Why can I override mine? What makes me different from my friends? The answer isn't knowledge of math or probabilities.

Comment author: Nick_Tarleton 02 March 2010 04:59:58PM *  2 points [-]

I really don't know. Unusual mental architecture, like high reflectivity or 'stronger' deliberative relative to non-deliberative motivation? Low paranoia? High trust in logical argument?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit