= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Qiaochu_Yuan comments on Brainstorming for post topics - 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 (148)
I keep a list, in Workflowy, of titles for posts almost none of which I've turned into posts. (I generally recommend using Workflowy for capture in this way.) Here are the ones where I at least remember what the point of the post was supposed to be:
Ooh, what was in this one?
It was going to be something like a guide to what kind of mathematics it might be good for rationalists to learn, but when I started writing the post I realized it was a gigantic project and I didn't care about it enough to actually give it the time it deserved. Sorry!
That's too bad. Atm I'm planning my next five years of study in maths and related areas - got any quick hints?
What do you want to do?
Oh, I just meant what was in your list so I can take a look at that. Unless that amount of work involved was figuring out which maths was useful, in which case I'll understand if you can't help me.
Edit: I would like to work in FAI research after I get a degree in maths/computer science, so would like to spend the next few years studying appropriately.
Usefulness depends on the purpose for which you want to learn math.
And he specifically said he was talking about the maths useful for rationalists. I meant to imply that I wanted to know the areas, so I could go study them, because they would help me be more rational.
Yes, and he asked you what you want to do. Meaning that he might not give every rationalist the same recommendation. Someone who wants to work on AGI needs different math than someone who wants to go into another direction.
Cheers.
Wait, so you've tabled this project?
It's extremely tabled. It's chaired.
I would love to see these as posts. (I really enjoyed your posts on the CFAR list about human ethics).
What does "The instrumental lens" hint at?
At the time I had that idea I got the impression that some of the people around me were leaning too heavily on what I was calling the "epistemic lens," where your perspective on people is primarily based on their beliefs. I think this is mostly unhelpful, e.g. it can cause people to be snooty about religion for what I see to be no good reason. I think an "instrumental lens," where your perspective on people is primarily based on their actions, is much more helpful. In general I'm a fan of instrumental rationality, rather than epistemic rationality, being the more foundational thing.
How does one get on this list?