cousin_it 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: cousin_it 07 May 2009 12:40:13AM *  4 points [-]

Agree completely. I wasn't advocating ignorance or promoting complex models over simple ones a priori. Only well-fitting and robust simple models over poorly fitting and brittle ones.