= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vaniver comments on Best career models for doing research? - 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 (999)
Generally, if your immune system is fighting something, you're already sick. Most pathogens are benign or don't have the keys to your locks. This might be a similar situation- the idea is only troubling if your lock fits it- and it seems like then there would be rational methods to erode that fear (like the immune system mobs an infection).
The analogy definitely breaks down, doesn't it? What I had in mind was Eliezer, Roko, and Vlad saying "I got sick from this infection" and you saying "I did not get sick from this infection" - I would look at how strong each person's immune system is.
So if Eliezer, Roko, and Vlad all had weak immune systems and yours was quite robust, I would conclude that the bacterium in question is not particularly virulent. But if three robust immune systems all fell sick, and one robust immune system did not, I would be forced to decide between some hypotheses:
On the evidence I have, the middle two seem more likely than the first and last hypotheses.
I agree- my money is on #3 (but I'm not sure whether I would structure is as "fourth is immune" or "first three are vulnerable"- both are correct, but which is more natural word to use depends on the demographic response).