Mark_Friedenbach comments on Confound it! Correlation is (usually) not causation! But why not? - Less Wrong

44 Post author: gwern 09 July 2014 03:04AM

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

Comments (34)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 11 July 2014 03:45:13PM 3 points [-]

That sounds more like a poor understanding of Occam's razor. Complex ontologically basic processes is not simpler than a handful of strict mathematical rules.

Comment author: gwern 11 July 2014 05:38:17PM *  4 points [-]

Of course it's (normatively) wrong. But if that particular error is what's going on in peoples' heads, it'll manifest as a different pattern of errors (and hence useful interventions) than an availability bias: availability bias will be cured by forcing generation of scenarios, but a preference for oversimplification will cause the error even if you lay out the various scenarios on a silver platter, because the subject will still prefer the maximally simple version where A->B rather than A<-C->B.