Kaj_Sotala comments on I Was Not Almost Wrong But I Was Almost Right: Close-Call Counterfactuals and Bias - Less Wrong

54 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 08 March 2012 05:39AM

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

Comments (39)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 05 March 2012 09:33:45PM 6 points [-]

Tetlock (1998) also provided me with the two funniest-sounding sentences that I've read in a while (though that doesn't make them incorrect). Commenting on the "concede the counterfactual, but insist that it does not matter for the overall theory" defense:

This defense, which is the most popular of the three, is designated a second-order counterfactual inasmuch as it undoes the undoing of the original close-call counterfactual. Second-order counterfactuals allow for deviations from reality but minimize the significance of the deviations by invoking additional causal forces that soon bring events in the simulated counterfactual world back toward the observed historical path.