= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobinZ comments on The Cameron Todd Willingham test - 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 (83)
What is this supposed to teach us about rationality that we did not learn from the Amanda Knox case?
I don't think it is a good idea to invoke any sort of controversy without some specific novel point to make. I would not object were it just a thought experiment in an open thread, but good cause is necessary for a top-level post.
I asked two questions that I wanted to see answers for. And the Bayesian justice question is a really hard question.
Every post does not have to be made with the specific goal of teaching rationality. There is a much larger set of possible purposes for posts.
This thread probably belongs in the meta thread.
Done.
I don't see what the harm is in more practice.
I would hold top-level posts to a higher standard than "don't see the harm".
Right, top level posts need to be held to a strict standard: they need to be good, not just "somewhat nice to have around". Furthermore, they should include things of practical relevance to our everyday existence, like materials science, recycling, non-destructive fasteners, etc.