billswift comments on [Link] “Proxy measures, sunk costs, and Chesterton's fence”, or: the sunk cost heuristic - Less Wrong

7 Post author: kpreid 08 August 2012 02:39PM

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

Comments (5)

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

Comment author: billswift 08 August 2012 05:31:05PM 6 points [-]

it depends upon your past self having more information than your current self.

Or maybe you just spent more time thinking it through before. "Never doubt under pressure what you have calculated at leisure." I think that previous states should have some influence on your current choices. As the link says:

If your evidence may be substantially incomplete you shouldn't just ignore sunk costs -- they contain valuable information about decisions you or others made in the past, perhaps after much greater thought or access to evidence than that of which you are currently capable.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 08 August 2012 07:58:50PM 0 points [-]

That presumes you've forgotten why you did something to begin with, your reasoning having created that information. Again, given the precise conditions, I think it's a perfectly fine argument. I just don't find those conditions more probable than the converse, which is to say, having more information.

Comment author: drethelin 08 August 2012 07:46:12PM 1 point [-]

Also remember the corollary that any decision made under pressure could probably stand to be reviewed at leisure.

Comment author: billswift 08 August 2012 11:05:55PM *  1 point [-]

Everybody does that anyway, it is usually called second-guessing yourself. The best rule is to not decide under pressure unless you really have to, take the time to think things through.