Psy-Kosh comments on Where Recursive Justification Hits Bottom - Less Wrong

41 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 July 2008 10:16AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (73)
Tags: bayesian philosophy religion

Comments (73)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: DanielLC 03 September 2011 02:43:37AM 0 points [-]

if the principle of indifference or whatever would lead you to assign equivalent probabilities to P(C) and P(A)

How do you know that? Why must P(A) be a function of the complexity of A?

Also, this is only sufficient to yield a bound on Occam's razor. How do you know that the universe doesn't favor a given complexity?

Comment author: Psy-Kosh 05 September 2011 02:31:44PM 0 points [-]

Not a sole function of its complexity, but if A and B have the same complexity, and you have no further initial reason to place more belief in one or the other, then would you agree that you should assign P(A) = P(B)?

Comment author: DanielLC 05 September 2011 11:23:02PM 0 points [-]

Complexity is a function of the hypothesis. Other functions can be made. In fact, complexity isn't even a specific function. What language are we using?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit