= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
nyan_sandwich comments on Stuff That Makes Stuff Happen - 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 (127)
Is there some reason not to treat logical stuff as normal causal nodes? Does that cause us actual trouble, or is it just a bit confusing sometimes?
In causal models, we can have A -> B, E -> A, E -> ~B. Logical uncertainty does not seem offhand to have the same structure as causal uncertainty.
You seem to be confusing the causal arrow with the logical arrow. As endoself points out here proofs logically imply their theorems, but a theorem causes its proof.