stcredzero comments on What's in a name? That which we call a rationalist… - Less Wrong

4 Post author: badger 24 April 2009 11:53PM

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

Comments (88)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 25 April 2009 03:11:56AM 4 points [-]

(a) Nobody can actually be Bayesian. Nothing made of quarks can be Bayesian.

(b) This is such a good existing word that I would be afraid of contaminating it if something goes wrong, and others might not take well to anyone trying to "steal" it.