Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

I_D_Sparse comments on Double Crux — A Strategy for Resolving Disagreement - Less Wrong

58 Post author: Duncan_Sabien 29 November 2016 09:23PM

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

Comments (102)

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

Comment author: I_D_Sparse 13 March 2017 08:12:10PM 0 points [-]

Not particularly, no. In fact, there probably is no such method - either the parties must agree to disagree (which they could honestly do if they're not all Bayesians), or they must persuade each other using rhetoric as opposed to honest, rational inquiry. I find this unfortunate.

Comment author: snewmark 15 March 2017 01:52:16PM *  0 points [-]

Either the parties must agree to disagree (which they could honestly do if they're not all Bayesians...

Could you elaborate on that? Sorry, I just don't get it.

Comment author: Lumifer 15 March 2017 03:11:50PM 1 point [-]

It's a hint at Aumann's theorem.

Comment author: snewmark 16 March 2017 03:04:30PM 0 points [-]

Oh, I wasn't aware that they had to be Bayesian for that rule to apply, thanks for the help.