Vladimir_Nesov comments on Counterfactual Calculation and Observational Knowledge - Less Wrong

11 Post author: Vladimir_Nesov 31 January 2011 04:28PM

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

Comments (183)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 08 February 2011 06:28:37PM *  1 point [-]

Pearl's counterfactuals (or even causal diagrams) are unhelpful, as they ignore the finer points of logical control that are possibly relevant here. For example, that definitions (facts) are independent should refer to the absence of logical correlation between them, that is inability to infer (facts about) one from the other. But this, too, is shaky in the context of this puzzle, where the nature of logical knowledge is called into question.

Comment author: lukstafi 08 February 2011 09:48:56PM 0 points [-]

Is it a trivial remark regarding the probability theory behind Pearl's "causality", or an intuition with regard to future theories that resemble Pearl's approach?

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 08 February 2011 10:14:27PM 0 points [-]

It is a statement following from my investigation of logical/ambient control and reality-as-normative-anticipation thesis which I haven't written much about, but this all is regardless called in question as adequate foundation in light of the thought experiment.