Yahooey comments on Rationality Quotes July 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Vaniver 02 July 2013 04:21PM

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

Comments (425)

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

Comment author: Yahooey 07 July 2013 12:22:53AM 0 points [-]

It's enough for a strong presumption of it being better, pending evidence to the contrary.

There is plenty of evidence that behaviour is not always rational which in my mind shifts the burden of proof.

Comment author: DanArmak 07 July 2013 08:26:53AM 0 points [-]

It's true that people sometimes behave instrumentally-irrationally in the sense that they don't take the correct steps to reach their goal of happiness. But that fact, alone, is relatively weak evidence: people are a little irrational, not completely wrong about what makes them happy.

Your reply can be read very generally ("behavior is not always rational, therefore it's not positively correlated with desired results"). Please specify what you meant more precisely.

Comment author: Yahooey 07 July 2013 09:20:32AM *  1 point [-]

I'm saying that the argument that most people are doing something is not proof that what they are doing is better. In other words, the fact that most rich people choose not to give away all of their fortune is not proof that being rich is better than being poor. Why they choose not to give it all away cannot be inferred from their actions.

Personally I would state that this is a false dichotomy and that Rich is better than Poor because it is not-Poor. It isn't necessarily the best state of not-Poor.

Comment author: DanArmak 07 July 2013 01:04:27PM 1 point [-]

I'm saying that the argument that most people are doing something is not proof that what they are doing is better.

It's evidence that what they are doing is, or leads to, something being better. And in the cases where it isn't, we can point to a specific mechanism that subverts the general rule (e.g.: addiction).

Personally I would state that this is a false dichotomy and that Rich is better than Poor because it is not-Poor. It isn't necessarily the best state of not-Poor.

You seem to be talking about having a middle amount of money.

Whereas I'm saying a simple thing: for any two amounts of money X, Y where X > Y, all else being equal, is is better to have X (more) and not Y (less). And in particular, it's better to have lots of money (rich) than very little (poor).

Comment author: Watercressed 07 July 2013 02:57:01AM 0 points [-]

What do you mean by not rational? People reporting higher satisfaction when they're rich even though they feel less happiness?