dspeyer comments on Mixed Reference: The Great Reductionist Project - Less Wrong

29 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 05 December 2012 12:26AM

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

Comments (353)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: dspeyer 05 December 2012 04:44:22AM 6 points [-]

I realize this is a small thing, but this essay appears to use "fact" to mean "a statement sufficiently well-formed to be either true or false" rather than "a statement which is true" and that kept distracting me from its actual point. Can some other word be found?

Comment author: Tyrrell_McAllister 06 December 2012 05:38:11PM 0 points [-]

Has the post been edited since you made this comment? I couldn't find any examples of this.

Comment author: dspeyer 07 December 2012 06:17:11AM 0 points [-]

"If Oswald hadn't shot Kennedy, nobody else would've" is a fact

Comment author: Tyrrell_McAllister 07 December 2012 12:18:43PM 0 points [-]

He is saying that that is a fact, but not merely because it is "a statement sufficiently well-formed to be either true or false". For example, he would say that "If Oswald hadn't shot Kennedy, somebody else would've" is not a fact, even though it is equally well formed. The point of the article is to explain how some counterfactuals can be facts while others are not.