= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
owencb comments on Common sense as a prior - 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 (212)
This sounds roughly right to me. Note that there's are two different things you really want to know about people:
(1) What they believe on the matter;
(2) Who they think is trustworthy on the matter.
Often it seems that (2) is more important, even when you're looking at people who are deemed trustworthy. If I have a question about lung disease, most people will not have much idea to (1), and recommend doctors for (2). Most doctors will have some idea, and recommend specialists for (2). Specialists are likely to have a pretty good idea for (1), and recommend the top people in their field for (2). These are the people you really want to listen to for (1), if you can, but regular people would not tend to know who they were.
I'm not sure exactly how you should be weighting (1) against (2), but the principle of using both, and following through chains to at least some degree, feels natural.