Qiaochu_Yuan comments on Falsifiable and non-Falsifiable Ideas - Less Wrong

-1 Post author: shaih 19 February 2013 02:24AM

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: shaih 19 February 2013 07:28:04AM *  0 points [-]

What is this referring to?

I think you've lost track of why we were talking about Einstein. In the original post, you listed two reasons to believe non-falsifiable things. I asked you to give an example of the first one. Maybe it wasn't sufficiently clear that I was asking for an example which wasn't falsifiable, in which case I apologize, but I was (after all, that's why it came up in the first place). Relativity is falsifiable. A heuristic that beautiful things tend to be true is also falsifiable.

quote break

Whether or not you do, most people do not optimize for truth. Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing, and in either case, why?

Perhaps it would be easier for me to replace the word happiness with Awesomeness in which case I could see the argument that optimizing for awesomeness would let me seek out ways to make the world more awesome and would allow specific circumstances of what i consider awesome to be to govern which truths to seek out. In this way I can understand optimizing for awesomeness.

I think it is a good thing most people do not optimize for truth because if it were so I don't think the resulting world would be awesome. It would be a world where many people were less happy even though it would also probably be a world with more scientific advances.

I suppose that if anyone were to optimize for truth it would be a minority who wanted to advance science further to make the general population more happy while the scientist themselves were not always. Even in this case I could understand the argument that they were optimizing awesomeness not truth because they thought the resulting world would be more awesome.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 19 February 2013 07:43:15AM *  0 points [-]

I still don't see how anything you've said about Einstein is relevant to the original question I asked, which was for an example of a belief that you thought was beautiful, non-falsifiable, and worth holding.

I think it is a good thing most people do not optimize for truth because if it were so I don't think the resulting world would be awesome. It would be a world where many people were less happy even though it would also probably be a world with more scientific advances.

Cool. So we agree now that truth does not trump awesomeness? (Somewhat tangential comment: science is not the only way to seek out truth. I also have in mind things like finding out whether you were adopted.)

Comment author: shaih 19 February 2013 07:49:16AM 2 points [-]

You're right Einstien was not relevant to your original question. I brought him up because I did not understand the question until

I think you've lost track of why we were talking about Einstein. In the original post, you listed two reasons to believe non-falsifiable things. I asked you to give an example of the first one. Maybe it wasn't sufficiently clear that I was asking for an example which wasn't falsifiable, in which case I apologize, but I was (after all, that's why it came up in the first place). Relativity is falsifiable. A heuristic that beautiful things tend to be true is also falsifiable.

Thanks for leading me to the conclusion truth does not trump awesomeness and yes I now agree with this.

I also have in mind things like finding out whether you were adopted

Good point