= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nick_Tarleton comments on Reductionism - 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 (150)
I'm surprised that this point is controversial enough that Eliezer felt the need to make a post about it, and even more surprised that he's catching heat in the comments for it. This "reductionism" is something I believe down to the bone, to the extent that I have trouble conceptualizing the world where it is false.
Seconded.
I suppose the next post is on how a non-reductionist universe would overwhelmingly violate Occam's Razor?
Hmmm... from my understanding, Occam's Razor is not actually a Law, just an overwhelmingly useful Heuristic. Thus, I'm not sure that "violating" Occam's Razor means more than just saying that something is "far less likely". I don't believe it can be used to prove that a non-reductionist universe is "not true".