Jiro comments on Open thread, Jul. 11 - Jul. 17, 2016 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: MrMind 11 July 2016 07:09AM

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

Comments (131)

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

Comment author: ChristianKl 14 July 2016 08:03:22PM 1 point [-]

Empirically I don't find this to be the case. I think most skeptics do have believes of anticipation that various paranormal effects won't happen. At the same time bring a skeptic in situations where his beliefs about the domain might reasonably get challenged they might make excuses in advance.

People have their personal probabilities in regard to how strongly they hold anticipatory beliefs. It's not all or nothing.

Most people don't use probability for their beliefs. They use mental processes such as the availability heuritistic, that doesn't correspond directly to probabilities.

See Dennet's Belief in Belief and Sagan's Garage Dragon for more info.

Neither Dennet nor Sagan are a psychologist or have similar experience with working with beliefs in other context. If you use their discussions that are essentially about ontology as being discussions about how humans reason you are going to make mistakes.

Comment author: Jiro 15 July 2016 02:45:47PM 0 points [-]

At the same time bring a skeptic in situations where his beliefs about the domain might reasonably get challenged they might make excuses in advance.

I can guess that if you were to meet a flat-earther with the intent of engaging with his ideas, you would start thinking of what things he might show you and why those things wouldn't actually demonstrate a flat earth. That does not mean you are making "excuses in advance".

"He's probably going to show me how ships disappear on the horizon, but I know that is affected by air refraction." "Oh, you're just making an excuse in advance."

Comment author: ChristianKl 15 July 2016 08:44:23PM *  1 point [-]

That does not mean you are making "excuses in advance".

What empiric standard would you use to classify things as making excuses in advance?

Comment author: Jiro 16 July 2016 06:36:53AM 0 points [-]

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that "I can respond to any claim he's likely to make" isn't it. I'm not sure there is such a thing at all, short of having your idea be outright unfalsifiable.

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 July 2016 05:24:53PM 1 point [-]

It seems like there something that the OP means with "making excuses in advance". It might not what you think would be rightly called "making excuses in advance".

I don't think that category exists in a way where it can be successfully used to distinguish people who have anticipations and are identified with a belief from people who are just identified with it.