Will_Pearson comments on Friedman's "Prediction vs. Explanation" - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 September 2008 06:15AM

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

Comments (79)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Will_Pearson 29 September 2008 06:58:33PM 0 points [-]

A few thoughts.

I would like the one that:

0) Doesn't violate any useful rules of thumb, e.g. conservation of energy, allowing transmitting information faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. 1) Gives more precise predictions. To be consistent with a theory isn't hard if the theory gives a large range of uncertainty. E.g. if one theory is 2) Doesn't have any infinities in its range

If all these are equal, I would prefer them equally. Otherwise I would have to think that something was special about the time they were suggested, and be money pumped.

For example: Assume that I was asked this question many times, but my memory wiped in between times. If I preferred the predicting theory, they could alternate which scientist discovered the theory first, and charge me a small amount of money to get the first guys theory, but get the explanatory one for free. So I would be forever switching between theories, purely on their temporalness. Which seems a little weird.