Perplexed comments on Morality as Parfitian-filtered Decision Theory? - 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 (270)
The only thing Omega uses its omniscience for is to detect if you're lying, so if humans are bad at convincing lying you don't need omniscience.
Also, "prefer to assume" indicates extreme irrationallity, you can't be rational if you are choosing what to believe based on anything other than the evidence, see Robin Hanson's post You Are Never Entitled to Your Opinion. Of course you probably didn't mean that, you probably just meant:
Say what you mean, otherwise you end up with Belief in Belief.
As I have answered repeatedly on this thread, when I said "prefer to assume", I actually meant "prefer to assume". If you are interpreting that as "prefer to believe" you are not reading carefully enough.
One makes (sometimes fictional) assumptions when constructing a model. One is only irrational when one imagines that a model represents reality.
If it makes you happy, insert a link to some profundity by Eliezer about maps and territories at this point in my reply.
Heh, serve me right for not paying attention.