= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on Comments for "Rationality" - 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 (38)
Even when talking to yourself, the rest of his point holds- there is nothing magical about the label "rationality" that you're gonna find in the territory- it's just part of how you mark up your map.
That said, I don't actually seem to think in English (or any other interhuman language) all that much unless I'm planning out what to say (or what I want to say). This is something that I've only noticed fairly recently, and it seems to be something that most people don't realize.
Talking to yourself when planning what to say certainly counts as "for communication between two people".
Yes, the rest of Eliezer's point holds; that would be why I didn't criticize the rest of Eliezer's point.
Different people think in words to different extents. (And for some of what seems like thinking in words, perhaps the word-generation is more or less epiphenomenal -- though I'd expect it always has some value, e.g. in helping the short-term memory along.) I find that I use words in the same sort of way as I use diagrams or mathematical symbols: as a way to avoid losing track of what I'm thinking, and to enable some degree of rigour when it's needed.
Yes, there are situations when talking to yourself can usefully be considered "communication between two people", but those aren't the situations I had in mind.