Emile comments on Existential Risk and Public Relations - Less Wrong

36 Post author: multifoliaterose 15 August 2010 07:16AM

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

Comments (613)

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

Comment author: Emile 17 August 2010 03:26:37PM 2 points [-]

But it isn't perceived as so by the general public - it seems to me that the usual perception of "confidence" has more to do with status than with probability estimates.

The non-technical people I work with often say that I use "maybe" and "probably" too much (I'm a programmer - "it'll probably work" is a good description of how often it does work in practice) - as if having confidence in one's statements was a sign of moral fibre, and not a sign of miscalibration.

Actually, making statements with high confidence is a positive trait, but most people address this by increasing the confidence they express, not by increasing their knowledge until they can honestly make high-confidence statements. And our culture doesn't correct for that, because errors of calibration are not immediatly obvious (as they would be if, say, we had a widespread habit of betting on various things).

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 17 August 2010 03:51:12PM 1 point [-]

That a lie is likely to be misinterpreted or not noticed doesn't make it not a lie, and conversely.

Comment author: Emile 17 August 2010 04:08:27PM 0 points [-]

Oh, I fully agree with your point; it's a pity that high confidence on unusual topics is interpreted as arrogance.

Comment author: Perplexed 17 August 2010 04:11:05PM 0 points [-]

Try this: I prefer my leaders to be confident. I prefer my subordinates to be truthful.