= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
katydee comments on Epistemic and Instrumental Tradeoffs - 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 (22)
The distinction between instrumental and epistemic rationality is dramatic enough that I wonder if we should really be using the same word for both.
ETA: Just as I was posting this I came up with a response: The two variants might be well described as seeking correct knowledge and correct action respectively, with the common factor being correctness. So maybe using the same word plus a modifier does make sense.
ETA2: As army1987 points out below, I've just exhibited the same conflation I was concerned about. Embarrassing, but consider it evidence for my original point.
I think this is an interesting point. To be honest, I think whether we should be using the term "rationality" at all is very much an open question. Just as MIRI changed its name thanks to unwanted associations with other things using the term "singularity," we might be better served by avoiding the term "rationality" and coming up with something else.
My friends label me as "rational" (or alternatively, "hyper-rational") when talking about my stereotypically Spock-like characteristics. I'm all in favor of splitting up the overload on the word.
If we invent a new word, and the word will become famous enough, sooner or later Hollywood will make a movie using this word to describe a protagonist who does not completely satisfy the definition and also has many unrelated weird traits, and then we are back at the beginning.