Vive-ut-Vivas comments on What I've learned from Less Wrong - Less Wrong

79 Post author: Louie 20 November 2010 12:47PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (232)
Tags: rationality meta sequences

Comments (232)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 20 November 2010 09:07:58PM 1 point [-]

I think it's pretty well-established here that having accurate beliefs shouldn't actually hurt you.

Not at all. It is well established having accurate beliefs should not hurt a perfect bayesian intelligence. Believing it applied to mere humans would be naive in the extreme.

It's not a good strategy to change your actual beliefs so that you can signal more effectively -- and it probably wouldn't work, anyway.

The fact that we are so damn good at it is evidence to the contrary!

Comment author: Vive-ut-Vivas 20 November 2010 09:36:52PM 0 points [-]

I'm not understanding the disagreement here. I'll grant that imperfect knowledge can be harmful, but is anybody really going to argue that it isn't useful to try to have the most accurate map of the territory?

Comment author: wedrifid 20 November 2010 10:48:42PM 1 point [-]

We are talking about signalling. So for most people yes.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit