= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Is my view contrarian? - 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 (94)
So, Alice likes cabernet and dislikes merlot. Alice says "I value cabernet more than merlot". This is a value judgement. How is it a part of Alice's world model and which world model?
By any chance, are you calling "a world model" the totality of a person's ideas, perceptions, representations, etc. of external reality?
Alice is part of the world, right? So any belief about Alice is part of a world model. Any belief about Alice's preference for cabernet is part of a world model - specifically, the world model of who-ever holds that belief.
Yes. (The phrase "the totality of" could, without any impact on our current discussion, be replaced with "elements of". )
Is there something wrong with that? I inferred that to also be the meaning of the original poster.
Not "whoever", we are talking specifically about Alice. Is Alice's preference for cabernet part of Alice's world model?
I have a feeling we're getting into the snake-eating-its-own-tail loops. If Alice's preferences are part of Alice's world model then Alice's world model is part of Alice's world model as well. Recurse until you're are reduced to praying to the Holy Trinity of Godel, Escher, and Bach :-)
Could it? You are saying that value judgments must be a part of. Are there "elements of" which do not contain value judgements?
That strikes me as a question for dictionary writers. If we agree that Newton's laws of motion constitute such an element, then clearly, there are such elements that do not not contain value judgements.
iff she perceives that preference.
I'm not sure this follows by logical necessity, but how is this unusual? When I mention Newton's laws, am I not implicitly aware that I have this world model? Does my world model, therefore, not include some description of my world model? How is this relevant?