= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
John_Maxwell_IV comments on Three ways CFAR has changed my view of rationality - 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 (58)
Same for learning about Bayes' rule.
Learning about Bayes' rule improves one's epistemic rationality; I'm arguing that learning about chess does the same.
I guess this is the point where humans and theoretical rational agents diverge. Rational agents don't learn rationality - it's just assumed that they come pre-wired with all the correct mathematics and philosophy required to make optimal choices for all possible games.
But on the human side, I still don't think that's really a valid comparison. Being able to use Bayes' rule improves rationality in the general case. It falls under the heading of "philosophy, epistemology, mathematics".
Chess just gives you knowledge about a specific system. It falls under the heading of "science, inference, evidence".
There's a qualitative difference between the realm of philosophy and mathematics and the realm of reality and observation.