= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on Metaphilosophical Mysteries - 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 (255)
From my (anecdotal but varied) experience talking to professional philosophers about them, I'd (off-the-cuff) estimate 80% are not familiar with expected utility maximization (in the sense of multiplying the probability of outcome by the utility) or Bayesian updating, and of the rest, a significant portion think that the Bayesian approach to probability is wrong or nonsensical, or that "expected utility maximization" is obviously wrongheaded because it sounds like Utilitarianism.
That matches my anecdotal and varied experience, and as we know, the singular of anecdote is 'update' and the plural is 'update more'.
Should I quote you for this one, or was it someone else originally?
"Utilitarianism" is a term for a specific concept hogging a perfectly good name that could be used for something more general: utility-based decision making.