taryneast comments on Realistic epistemic expectations - Less Wrong

14 Post author: JonahSinick 31 May 2015 10:52PM

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

Comments (11)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 01 June 2015 03:12:43AM *  4 points [-]

It's often possible to sidestep the difficulty of communicating evidence by focusing on explaining relevant concepts, which usually doesn't require evidence (or references), except as clarifying further reading. Evidence may be useful as motivation, when it's easier to communicate in the outline than the concepts, but not otherwise. And after the concepts are clear, evidence may become easier to communicate.

(Imagine trying to convince a denizen of Ancient Greece that there is a supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. You won't get to presenting actual astronomical observations for quite some time, and might start with the entirely theoretical geometry and mechanics. Even the mechanics doesn't have to be motivated by experimental verification, as it's interesting as mathematics on its own. And mentioning black holes may be ill-advised at that stage.)

Comment author: taryneast 04 June 2015 11:55:01PM 1 point [-]

I think this depends strongly on whether the person you're explaining-to is initially open or closed to your ideas.

An example - if a new-earth creationist approached me to talk about their ideas on the creation of earth - I would not want them to spend time explaining their ideas until they showed me sufficient evidence to warrant my expenditure of time.

By comparison, most people on LessWrong I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt and let them explain the idea, then go look up evidence to confirm whether it has a solid foundation.

Keeping in mind that tendency to auto-accept ideas told to us...