= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on No Universal Probability Space - 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 (44)
Yep, you shouldn't wirehead yourself into developing a theory about the mathematical formalism, you should instead develop a theory about the world. But the theory that you develop should be mathematical where possible.
There's nothing wrong with doing pure Math, if you know that's what your doing.
Arguably there may be, if it can be shown that you normatively should worry only about the real world, even if what you are doing in the real world is thinking math.
It can't be. Not in any system of norms I would give a fig about. Art, Fiction, and Math are worthwhile. They don't have to be useful. If you disagree with that, then we simply have different utility functions, and there's no point in arguing further.
You are seeing "useful" too narrowly. I only stated that whatever you consider "useful", it's probably a statement exclusively about the real world, and "doing math" is one of the activities in the real world. I don't see how you could place Art in the same cached thought, since it was remarked many times that you shouldn't go Spock.