Vladimir_Nesov comments on Specific Fiction Discusion (April 2011) - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Armok_GoB 14 April 2011 12:29PM

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

Comments (158)

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

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 14 April 2011 11:12:03PM 8 points [-]

The "Feeling Pinkie Keen" episode may be fun to analyze from a rationalist/Bayesian perspective. Was Twilight Sparkle being rational to jump based on Pinkie Pie's sense at the end? What would have to be the priors at the beginning of the episode for it to be the correct decision at the end, after all the accumulated evidence? :-)

Comment author: Armok_GoB 15 April 2011 08:01:22PM 5 points [-]

Semi relevant; I posted the following LWish thing in a discussion thread on a forum:

"we here have an enormous amount of extremely strong and general evidence that excludes huge areas of hypothesis space. This is the STRONGLY DOMINANT reason you shouldn't believe certain kinds of things even if someone you trust sincerely tells you to. Things like "physical laws don't have exceptions, no exceptions", "¨there are no irreducibly mental (=supernatural) phenomena", "Due to huge flaws in the way human brains work, billions of people CAN be wrong, and frequently are. You can't even trust your own brain.". We have no reason to believe Equestria and ponykind have similar overriding principles. "

(Please note that this was not written for LW, so therefore I were sloppy and also oversimplifying things due to inferential distance.)