= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FAWS comments on Reasoning isn't about logic (it's about arguing) - 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 (30)
Part of the problem is that we have a much better worked out theory of reasoning than of arguing. So we are tempted to apply our theory of reasoning to evaluate our arguments, where we should prefer to apply a theory of arguing. So what we need is a better theory of arguing - what counts as a good argument, a good reply, etc.
Wouldn't that be even worse? If we currently mostly don't use good reasoning for individual truth seeking, but in at least occasionally use good reasoning to argue, wouldn't developing a theory of arguing contribute to displacing that, resulting in even less good reasoning? Or do you think that reasoning would become better for truth seeking if it was freed from the other optimization goal of being good for arguing?