ygert comments on Three ways CFAR has changed my view of rationality - Less Wrong

102 Post author: Julia_Galef 10 September 2013 06:24PM

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

Comments (58)

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

Comment author: ygert 10 September 2013 12:16:28PM 0 points [-]

If we go by a definition based on actions, rather than skills, I think this problem goes away:

Let's define an action as instrumentally rational if it brings you closer to your goal. Let's define an action as epistemicly rationality if it brings your mental model of reality closer to reality itself.

Those are the definitions which I generally use and find useful, and I think they successfully sidestep your problems.

The question then remains how does one define rational skills. However, answering that question is less of an issue once you know what actions are instrumentally/epistemicly rational. If you may want to learn a skill, it is possible to ask whether the action of learning that skill falls under the categories mentioned above.

Comment author: tom_cr 11 September 2013 01:43:30AM 5 points [-]

Let's define an action as instrumentally rational if it brings you closer to your goal.

Suppose my goal is to get rich. Suppose, on a whim, I walk into a casino and put a large amount of money on number 12 in a single game of roulette. Suppose number 12 comes up. Was that rational?

Same objection applies to your definition of epistemicaly rational actions.