= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
steven0461 comments on Rational Me or We? - 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 (128)
No, you should still be swayed, you just shouldn't represent the swaying as being independent analysis. You also should take into account that the opinions of other group members may have been caused by swaying rather than independent analysis, but that was already true in the individual accuracy case.
Roko, when you run into a case of "group win / individual loss" on epistemic rationality you should consider that a Can't Happen, like violating conservation of momentum or something.
In this case, you need to communicate one kind of information (likelihood ratios) and update on the product of those likelihood ratios, rather than trying to communicate the final belief. But the Can't Happen is a general rule.
Really!? No exceptions?
This doesn't feel right. If it is right, it sounds important. Please could you elaborate?