Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

DSimon comments on Strategic ignorance and plausible deniability - Less Wrong

37 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 10 August 2011 09:30AM

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

Comments (56)

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

Comment author: DSimon 11 August 2011 03:01:15AM 2 points [-]

Avoiding the evidence would be irrational. Focusing on more important evidence is not.

This is a very good point. We cannot gather all possible evidence all the time, and trying to do so would certainly be instrumentally irrational.

Is the standard then that it's instrumentally rational to prioritize Bayesian experiments by how likely their outcomes are to affect one's decisions?

Comment author: Davorak 11 August 2011 01:49:25PM 1 point [-]

Is the standard then that it's instrumentally rational to prioritize Bayesian experiments by how likely their outcomes are to affect one's decisions?

It weighs into the decision, but it seems like it is insufficient by itself. An experiment can change my decision radically but be on unimportant topic(s). Topics that do not effect goal achieving ability. It is possible to imagine spending ones time on experiments that change one's decisions and never get close to achieving any goals. The vague answer seems to be prioritize by how much the experiments will be likely to help achieve ones goals.