= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Scott_Scheule comments on Uncritical Supercriticality - 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 (159)
Sam Harris came closer when he put the accusing finger on faith. If you don't place an appropriate burden of proof on each and every additional nice claim, the affective resonance gets started very easily.
How does one determine the appropriate burden of proof?
I would say that is when there is empirical evidence supporting the claim but, try as you might, you can't find any that falsifies it.
I think having a flawed (human) agent using this technique is too susceptible to the agent convincing themselves that they tried hard enough, and so we've just pushed the problem one step back: How do you know when you've tried hard enough.