= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FiftyTwo comments on Open Thread, June 16-30, 2013 - 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 (313)
So does that make stubbornness a kind of epistemic self defence?
Almost surely, yes. If other people keep telling you crazy things, not updating is a smart choice. Not the smartest one, but it is a simple strategy that anyone can use, cheaply (because we can't always afford verification).
Perhaps, but moving the local optimum from Politics-is-the-Mindkiller towards a higher sanity line seems to require dropping this defensive mechanism (on the societal level, at least).
First one must be able to tell the difference between reliable and unreliable sources of information. Only then it is safe to drop the defensive mechanism.
Just dropping the defensive mechanism could lead to whatever... for example massive religious zealotry. Or, more probably, some kind of political zealotry.
Unfortunately, one cannot simple revert stupidity. If a creationist refused to update to evolution, that's bad. But if they update to scientology, that's even worse. So before people start updating in masses, they better understand the difference.