DataPacRat comments on 2014 Less Wrong Census/Survey - Call For Critiques/Questions - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (269)
No explicit option for asexual and/or aromantic? (Or whatever the term would be for preferring not to be in a relationship, as opposed to not having a preference.)
For estimated probabilities that are greater than 99%, or less than 1%, how many digits of accuracy do you wish the answer to be? Just jump straight from 99% to 100%, or go for 99.999999% if that's honestly the best estimate?
I find this slightly unclear; does 'atheistic Buddhism' count as a 'revealed religion'?
I think the whole point of the world "revealed" is to avoid referring to something like "atheistic Buddhism".
Probably not. "Revealed religion" means something like "religion whose teachings are based on revelations from the divine to mankind". If you think that your religion was figured out, discovered, or intuited by a human being rather than delivered to him or her by the gods or spirits, it's not a "revealed religion".
Yes, this means Scientology is not a "revealed religion", because they think Hubbard discovered it. (Scientology is, however, a mystery religion, meaning that it has inner and outer teachings.)
I would be quite surprised if any of us could justifiably estimate any of those questions to an accuracy better than the nearest 1%/epsilon offset.
I regularly think in terms of decibans, where 10 decibans = 90% confidence, 20 = 99%, 30 = 99.9%, 40 = 99.99%, etc. From that perspective, there's as much difference between 99% and 99.9% as there is between 99.9% and 99.99%. Put another way, if 99% is the cut-off, then anything more than 20 decibans of evidence is ignored, even if the answerer has at least 40 decibans.
And yet every year lots and lots of respondents answer such questions with 0 or 100.