RichardKennaway comments on Instrumental rationality/self help resources - Less Wrong

35 Post author: gothgirl420666 18 July 2013 02:58AM

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

Comments (104)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 18 July 2013 09:38:04AM 0 points [-]

If learning a piece of knowledge will hurt you (emotionally, or be bad for your mental health) then it might be bad, instrumentally, to learn it.

Better, instrumentally, to learn to handle the truth. Ignorance and dullness are not qualities to be cultivated, however fortuitously useful on occasion it might be to not know something, or be unable to notice an implication of what you do know.

But if Epistemic Rationality didn't help me be instrumentally rational

If it doesn't, you're doing it wrong. This is the entire point of LessWrong.

Comment author: Lightwave 18 July 2013 11:18:49AM *  0 points [-]

Better, instrumentally, to learn to handle the truth.

It really depends on your goals/goal system. I think the wiki definition is supposed to encompass possible non-human minds that may have some uncommon goals/drives, like a wireheaded clippy that produces virtual paperclips and doesn't care whether they are in the real or virtual world, so it doesn't want/need to distinguish between them.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 18 July 2013 12:02:49PM *  0 points [-]

It really depends on your goals/goal system. I think the wiki definition is supposed to encompass possible non-human minds that may have some uncommon goals/drives, like a wireheaded clippy

I really do not care about hypothetical entities that have the goal of being ignorant, especially constructions like wireheaded clippies. It's generally agreed here that wireheading is a failure mode. So is the valorisation of ignorance by romanticism.