Benquo comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 25, chapter 96 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: NancyLebovitz 25 July 2013 04:36AM

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

Comments (524)

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

Comment author: Benquo 25 July 2013 03:46:54PM 21 points [-]

Ugh. Apparently the two definitions partition the set of all things.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 25 July 2013 06:56:29PM 18 points [-]

Great, now everything is falsifiable.

Comment author: BT_Uytya 25 July 2013 07:13:12PM 3 points [-]

I don't get it. Could you explain it please?

Comment author: OnTheOtherHandle 25 July 2013 07:37:17PM 10 points [-]

The first definition of "falsifiable" means that it's easy to fake - if a Patronus is falsifiable under this definition, you don't get much information when you see a Patronus, since it could easily be something else and you couldn't tell the difference.

The second definition of "falsifiable" means that it's easy to prove that it's not fake - if a Patronus is falsifiable under this definition, you get a lot of information when you see a Patronus, since it is very difficult for something that looks like a Patronus to actually be a fake.

Because the two defintions are pretty much opposites, between them they cover everything - the ones that are easily fakeable and the ones that are not easily fakeable.

Comment author: BT_Uytya 25 July 2013 07:52:10PM 1 point [-]

Aha! Thank you!

My mistake was that I kept thinking about "false" as in "false theory" instead of "false" as in "false money".

Comment author: mavant 25 July 2013 08:48:54PM 2 points [-]

At least one of the definitions is applicable to any arbitrary proposition. Either (1) it can be counterfeited, implying that there's no test you can perform to determine the true state of things, or (2) it can be tested to determine the true state of things.

Comment author: BT_Uytya 25 July 2013 09:34:45PM 0 points [-]

(non-native speaker here)

I was under impression that "to counterfeit" means only "to create imperfect copies in order to fraud someone", but it seems that it also means "to deceive". Thank you!

Comment author: DanielH 28 July 2013 05:52:33AM 3 points [-]

That first is the primary usage. Usually there is some way to tell a counterfeit from the real thing, but one can theoretically make a counterfeit that's indistinguishable from the original. I have only rarely heard it in the sense of "to deceive".