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

Kenny comments on Excluding the Supernatural - Less Wrong

37 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 12 September 2008 12:12AM

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

Comments (139)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: Kenny 22 May 2013 05:37:46PM *  2 points [-]

I personally can't imagine anything fundamentally complicated. I guess I could imagine tho that something might be a black box with complicated behavior, i.e. something complicated but with no parts that could be analyzed separately (because we can't open the box for whatever reason). But if this something was lawful, we could still analyze the various components of the laws that governed its behavior, e.g. "hmmm ... when we isolate the influence of x, the measurement of the output of the black box seems to correspond roughly to an exponential function of the measurement of x ...".

I don't think lawful and reducible are entirely (or even a little) independent. Really, I'm struggling to think of an example where 'lawful' doesn't mean 'reducible'.