= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobinZ comments on Compartmentalization as a passive phenomenon - 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 (71)
GEB has a section on this.
In order to not compartmentalize, you need to test if your beliefs are all consistent with each other. If your beliefs are all statements in propositional logic, consistency checking becomes the Boolean Satisfiability Problem, which is NP-complete. If your beliefs are statements in predicate logic, then consistency checking becomes PSPACE-complete, which is even worse than NP-complete.
Not compartmentalizing isn't just difficult, it's basically impossible.
I agree, save that I think Academian's proposal should be applied and "compartmentalizing" replaced with "clustering". "Compartmentalization" is a more useful term when restricted to describing the failure mode.