= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Error 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 former instance of “correct” means ‘true’, the latter means ‘good’. Still not the same thing.
Point. I wonder how I managed to notice the conflation of meanings for the word "rational" but not the word "correct." That's irritating. I was closer to being right before the edit.
Nitpick: I wouldn't say the latter means "good" precisely, but your point still stands.
There are so many words in English (but also in Italian, for that matter) that can be interpreted either normatively or descriptively (e.g. “should” can mean either ‘is most likely to’ or ‘had better’, also “right”, etc.) that being unambiguous between the two is more exceptional than being ambiguous.
I guess the reason for that is that, for social norms, the two coincide, i.e. the side of the road on which someone in a given country had better drive is the one on which someone in that country are most likely to drive, the past tense of a verb one had better use in a given language in a given register is the one speakers of that language in that register are most likely to use, the attire you had better wear on a job interview is the one people usually wear on job interviews, etc.