Vladimir_Nesov comments on POSITION: Design and Write Rationality Curriculum - Less Wrong

54 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 January 2012 06:50AM

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

Comments (174)

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

Comment author: cousin_it 19 January 2012 06:31:04PM *  15 points [-]

creating exercises does not make our present lack of robust measures worse than it already is (...) they seemed interested, and started noticing sunk cost fallacy examples in their lives

Martial arts masters and psychotherapy gurus could say the same. Instead of sunk costs you could teach newbies to notice post-colonial alienation or intelligent design, and sure enough they'd get better at noticing that thing in their lives. I hear scientologists do lots of exercises too. Maybe creating exercises before measures is a positive expected value decision, but I wouldn't bet on that.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 19 January 2012 10:31:00PM *  9 points [-]

"Sunk cost" is a pretty well-defined idea, we can reliably figure out whether something is a sunk cost, and whether a decision commits sunk cost fallacy, by checking whether the decision controls the amount of lost value and whether the (immutable) amount of lost value controls the decision. Skill at noticing sunk cost fallacy would then be ability to parse such situations quickly/automatically.

Testing effectiveness of training a skill is easier than testing usefulness of the skill, and I think figuring out how to train people to avoid a list of fallacies or to find correct decisions of standard kinds faster and more reliably is a reasonable goal, even if practical usefulness of having those skills remains uncertain.