CronoDAS comments on A few analogies to illustrate key rationality points - Less Wrong

50 Post author: kilobug 09 October 2011 01:00PM

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

Comments (52)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CronoDAS 09 October 2011 09:35:33PM 3 points [-]

So they learned the rules of chess, movement of the pieces, what "chess" and "chessmate" is

I think you mean "check" and "checkmate".

Comment author: florian 09 October 2011 10:05:27PM 2 points [-]

I assumed that was intentional, as the players would not know the terminology of chess if they had to deduce the rules.

Comment author: kilobug 10 October 2011 04:31:03PM 6 points [-]

Thanks for the excuse, but I've to admit... I was really a mistake :/ In French we say "échec" and "échec et mat" and the name of the game is "les Échecs". So... I confused the English terms.

But well, your excuse is cute, so I'll leave the mistake in the text ;)

Comment author: MarkusRamikin 10 October 2011 12:44:21PM *  2 points [-]

That doesn't seem to make sense. What are the odds they would have invented the word "chessmate" if the computer never used it?

Comment author: florian 10 October 2011 04:09:06PM 1 point [-]

It's a fictional example and it's not that uncommon in fiction to have terminology that's almost, but not entirely like the equivalent in the real world. I find that kind of thing amusing, so I thought the author might have a similar sense of humour, so it could be intentional. But I admit that Occam's razor supports the theory that it's simply a mistake.

Comment author: MarkusRamikin 10 October 2011 04:24:05PM *  0 points [-]

it's not that uncommon in fiction to have terminology that's almost, but not entirely like the equivalent in the real world.

Hm... That doesn't strike me as true, actually. Can you think of an example or three?

EDIT: Actually now that i think of it, this can be true for when an author is creating an alternative reality but wants things to be familiar to the audience. Like in Dragon Age, all the titles of the nobility and such things are similar to real-world terms for no special reason. But then compare Warhammer 40k, which is not an alternative world but rather a far future of ours: a computer is a "cogitator" and a camera is a "picter". Clearly different words, but rather than complete inventions, they're obviously based on somewhat plausible alternative etymologies.

However, that doesn't apply to a story like this, which is trying to logically follow from its starting premise, and in which the formation of the terms happens wthin the story itself. It's that plausible etymology that is lacking.