Perplexed comments on Newcomb's Problem: A problem for Causal Decision Theories - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (120)
And where, pray tell, might I look?
Asking folks to hypothetically accept the unbelievable does not, IMHO, "clear out distractions".
When I was getting my head around the subject I made them up myself. I considered what the problem would look like if I took out the 'absolute confidence' stuff. For example - forget Omega, replace him with Patrick Jane. Say Jane has played this game 1,000 times before with other people and only got it wrong (and/or lied) 7 times.
I assume you can at least consider TV show entertainment level counterfactuals for the purpose of solving these problems. Analysing the behavior of fictional characters in TV shows is a legitimate use for decision theory.
That would have made things difficult in high school science. Most example problems do exactly that. I distinctly remember considering planes and pulleys that were frictionless.* The only difference here is that the problem is harder (on our intuitions, if nothing else.)
* Did anyone else find it amusing when asked to consider frictionless ropes that were clearly fastened to the 200 kg weights with knots?