NancyLebovitz comments on Rationality Quotes June 2013 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Thomas 03 June 2013 03:08AM

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

Comments (778)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 04 June 2013 10:31:19AM 1 point [-]

Sorry, I wasn't very clear.

I meant that if you have a deep misunderstanding of what's going on, as here, what do you do about it?

Comment author: Cthulhoo 04 June 2013 02:42:24PM 0 points [-]

Well, it's somewhat hidden in steps 2 and 3. You have to be able to correctly state your hypothesis and to indentify all the possible variables. Consider chocolate water: your hipothesis is "There exist some brands of water that tastes like chocolate candy". Let's say for whatever reson you start with a prior probability p for this hypothesis. You then try some brands, find that none tastes like chocolate candy, and should therefore apply bayes and emerge with a lower posterior. What's much more effective, though, is evaluating the evidence you already have that induced you to believe the original hypothesis. What made you think that water could taste like chocolate? A friend told you? Did it appear in the news? In the more concrete cases:

  • Sex partners : Why did you expect them to be able to satisfy you without your input? What is your source? Porn movies?
  • Computer repair shops : Why did you expect people to work for free?
  • Diets : Have you talked to a professional? Gathered massive anedoctale evidence?