Sniffnoy comments on Non-trivial probability distributions for priors and Occam's razor - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Loading…
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (23)
Yes, it demonstrates that this statement is too weak to be really called "Occam's razor". But it doesn't contradict the statement. Is this standard, to use "contradict" to mean "contradict the intended connotation of"? That seems confusing.
I feel like at the very least, a demonstration that the argument, while technically correct, doesn't achieve the real-world implications it intended to should be taken as an invalidation of the point. I find that it is far too often that someone clings to the fact that their argument is technically correct even though it is irrelevant practically.
Not that anyone is doing that in this thread, as far as I can tell. But it's something to watch out for.