Student_UK comments on Rewriting the sequences? - Less Wrong

16 Post author: Student_UK 13 June 2011 02:14PM

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

Comments (23)

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

Comment author: Student_UK 15 June 2011 09:33:00AM 0 points [-]

So, is he defending one of these positions, or arguing against them all. Or saying the whole debate is pointless?

From what I read he seems to be suggesting that truth is independent of what we believe, but I'm not sure what else he is saying, or what his argument is.

Comment author: Liron 15 June 2011 05:13:45PM 8 points [-]

Here are the main points I understood:

The only way you can be sure your mental map accurately represents reality is by allowing a reality-controlled process to draw your mental map.

A sheep-activated pebble-tosser is a reality-controlled process that makes accurate bucket numbers.

The human eye is a reality-controlled process that makes accurate visual cortex images.

Natural human patterns of thought like essentialism and magical thinking are NOT reality-controlled processes and they don't draw accurate mental maps.

Each part of your mental map is called a "belief". The parts of your mental map that portray reality accurately are called "true beliefs".

Q: How do you know there is such a thing as "reality", and your mental map isn't all there is? A: Because sometimes your mental map leads you to make confident predictions, and they still get violated, and the prediction-violating thingy deserves its own name: reality.

Comment author: Student_UK 15 June 2011 10:33:57PM 1 point [-]

Thanks, that helps a lot.