army1987 comments on Hardened Problems Make Brittle Models - Less Wrong

51 Post author: cousin_it 06 May 2009 06:31PM

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

Comments (40)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 06 May 2009 09:49:28PM 27 points [-]

I agree that the true PD never happens in human existence, and that's yet another reason why I'm outraged at using a mathematically flawed decision theory to teach incoming students of rationality that they ought to betray their friends. (C, C) FTW!

(Actually, that would make a nice button.)

But I defend the use of simple models for the sake of understanding problems with mathematical clarity; if you can't model simple hypothetical things correctly, how does it help to try to model complex real things correctly first? In real life, no one is an economic agent; in real life, no laws except basic physics and theorems therefrom have universal force; in real life, an asteroid can always strike at any time; in real life, we can never use Bayesian reasoning... but knowing a bit of math still helps, even if it never applies perfectly above the level of quarks.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 March 2013 01:04:20AM 0 points [-]

if you can't model simple hypothetical things correctly, how does it help to try to model complex real things correctly first?

Well, people do do better on the Wason selection task when it's presented in terms of ages and drinks than in terms of letters and numbers.