DSimon comments on Theists are wrong; is theism? - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Will_Newsome 20 January 2011 12:18AM

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

Comments (533)

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

Comment author: DSimon 23 January 2011 09:24:41PM 0 points [-]

As curious agents ourselves, we're pre-tuned to find apparently-agent-caused things interesting. So, I don't think a redefinition necessarily took place.

Comment author: shokwave 24 January 2011 01:35:41AM *  1 point [-]

pre-tuned to find apparently-agent-caused things interesting

This is sort of what I meant. I am leery of accidentally going in the reverse direction - so instead of "thing A is agent-caused -> pretuned to find agent-caused interesting -> thing A is interesting" we get "thing A is interesting -> pretuned to find agent-caused interesting -> thing A is agent-caused".

This is then a redefinition; I have folded agent-caused into "interesting" and made it a necessary condition.