Eugine_Nier comments on Social Presuppositions - Less Wrong

11 Post author: lucidfox 02 December 2010 01:25PM

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

Comments (49)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 04 December 2010 10:48:14PM 1 point [-]

Edit: Actually, on thinking about it, I realize I'm being a doofus. You almost undoubtedly meant, not inferring A from G when A is more common in G than in the general population, but inferring A from G when A is more common than -A in G, which is a far more unreasonable thing to be upset about. My apologies.

Strictly speaking you should adjust your probability estimate of the person having attribute A either way. How you then act depends on the consequences of making either error., e.g., the consequences of falsely assuming someone isn't a violent criminal can be more serious then the reverse.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 05 December 2010 12:07:25AM *  0 points [-]

Yes; it would have been more precise to say "inferring a inappropriately high probability of A from G", rather than "inferring A from G."

And you're right that what I do based on my derived probability of A is independent of how I derived that probability, as long as I'm deriving it correctly. (This is related to cousin it's original complaint that inferring unflattering beliefs about people when I don't actually hurt them based on those beliefs ought not be labeled "stereotyping", so in some sense we've closed a loop here.)