= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jonathan_Graehl comments on I Was Not Almost Wrong But I Was Almost Right: Close-Call Counterfactuals and Bias - 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 (39)
Good abstract. Feels obvious, But then, there are some nice details that didn't come out in the summary, like "imagine different outcomes" being risky due to story-thinking. It's worth reading the whole thing for the excellent speculations on how and why.
Feels obvious until it gets to using counterfactuals for possible debiasing and the dangers in the technique — this was quite interesting for me.
Also interesting are the "five logically defensible strategies".
Quibble:
But different conclusions can be compatible?