arundelo comments on Rationality Quotes July 2011 - Less Wrong

2 Post author: Normal_Anomaly 03 July 2011 06:41AM

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

Comments (145)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: arundelo 07 July 2011 02:04:33AM 12 points [-]

Bill James was asked about the Holmes saying "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". He responded:

That Sherlock Holmes line is very, very interesting. It's false, and extremely arrogant, and very dangerous. That's not a real way to think about the world. This concept of eliminating the impossible -- we could never do that. The whole idea of Sherlock Holmes is dangerous because it encourages people to think that -- if they're intelligent enough -- they could put all the pieces together in absolute terms. But the human mind is not sophisticated enough to do that. People are not that smart. It's not that Sherlock Holmes would need to be twice as smart as the average person; he'd have to be a billion times as smart as the average person.

Comment author: Pfft 07 July 2011 04:26:22PM *  9 points [-]

Surely that also depends on the domain you are reasoning about? For example, when debugging computer programs it seems that I am eliminating the impossible all the time. "Hm, this function is not returning the answer I expect. Am I calling it with the wrong argument? (Printf -- no.) Are the calculations right up to this point? (Printf -- yes). Aha, this must be the line that's wrong!"

Comment author: arundelo 07 July 2011 07:15:09PM 6 points [-]

True! However, I know I've had times in program debugging (though I can't remember a specific one) when I eliminated something "impossible" and it turned out not to be. I think there was usually a flaw in my reasoning though, rather than a flaw in my knowledge of what's possible. (In other words, I overlooked some simple possibility.) Anyway, when I feel like I'm at the end of my debugging rope, I just start from the beginning with an eye towards stuff I could have missed the first time around, including stuff that I disregarded as "impossible".

Related: "select" Isn't Broken".

Comment author: handoflixue 09 July 2011 08:22:05AM 4 points [-]

I once wrote code that crashed my C++ compiler. For the life of me I Was sadly never able to reproduce it, but it's definitely in my book as an impossible error. (this is not "the programmed crashed when run", this was "the compiler crashed when trying to compile this program")

When debugging, I now label things as "extremely unlikely" instead...

Comment author: feanor1600 19 August 2011 04:08:13PM 2 points [-]

"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks." -- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 19 August 2011 04:14:52PM *  0 points [-]

This reminds me of something Eliezer said.

But the wonderful thing about unanswerable questions is that they are always solvable, at least in my experience. What went through Queen Elizabeth I's mind, first thing in the morning, as she woke up on her fortieth birthday? As I can easily imagine answers to this question, I can readily see that I may never be able to actually answer it, the true information having been lost in time.

On the other hand, "Why does anything exist at all?" seems so absolutely impossible that I can infer that I am just confused, one way or another, and the truth probably isn't all that complicated in an absolute sense, and once the confusion goes away I'll be able to see it.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 July 2011 09:03:45PM -1 points [-]

It's false

False.

and extremely arrogant

True. (So?)

and very dangerous.

True.

That's not a real way to think about the world.

False (unless he meant realistic?)

Comment author: khafra 11 July 2011 04:54:13PM 0 points [-]

It's false

False.

I think the previous appearance of a quote about this Sherlock Holmes quote bears out its falsity, except for Laplace's Demon-type intelligences.

Comment author: wedrifid 11 July 2011 06:25:21PM *  3 points [-]

I think the previous appearance of a quote about this Sherlock Holmes quote bears out its falsity, except for Laplace's Demon-type intelligences.

The statement is a literally true statement as a matter of logical deduction. When using the words 'true' and 'false' then logic is what you are doing. Applying the word 'false' to 'true' statements is simply an error, as would be holding this particular quote to a different standard to any other logical claim. It has the same problems as logical reasoning generally does, those of assuming certainty of premises and relying on incomplete or incorrect simplified models. Focus on the dangerous not incorrect because accuracy just is not the flaw.

Instead of false consider (something like) "f@#%ing stupid". Or you are just wrong.

Comment author: komponisto 10 July 2011 09:32:03PM 0 points [-]

It's false

False.

and extremely arrogant

True. (So?)

It seems a bad heuristic to follow for ordinary folks, susceptible to overconfidence in their judgements of "impossibility".