= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
handoflixue comments on [Poll] Who looks better in your eyes? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (98)
Substitute a relevant example as needed, I'm simply trying to make the point that ignorance != irrationality. Someone who simply has more information on a field is going to reach better conclusions, and will thus need to hide controversial opinions. Someone with less information is generally going to go with the "follow the herd" strategy, because in the absence of any other evidence, it's their best bet. Thus, just based on knowledge (not rationality!) you're going to see a split between A and B types.
There dosen't have to be a correlation of 1 between ignorance and irrationally. There just has to be some positive correlation for us to judge in the absence of other information A probably more rational than B.
And if there isn't a correlation greater than 0 between rationality and a proper map of reality, uhm what is this rationality thing anyway?
Ahhh, you're meaning "we have Bayesian evidence that Person B is less likely to be rational than Person A"? I'd agree, but I still think it's weak evidence if you're only looking at a single situation, and
I'd still feel I therefore know more about Person A (how they handle these situations) than I do about Person B (merely that they are either ignorant or irrational). How someone handles a situation strikes me as a more consistent trait, whereas most people seem to have enough gaps in their knowledge that a single gap is very little evidence for other gaps.
Yeah I should have been more explicit on that, sorry for the miscommunication!
Perhaps for convenience we can add that person A and B are exposed to the same information? It dosen't change the spirit of the thought experiment. I was originally implicitly operating with that as given but since we started discussing it I've noticed I never explicitly mentioned it.
Basically I wanted to compare what kinds of things person A/B would signal in a certain set of circumstances to others.
No worries. I think part of it was on me as well :)