MichaelBishop comments on Post Your Utility Function - Less Wrong

28 Post author: taw 04 June 2009 05:05AM

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

Comments (273)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 04 June 2009 05:39:51PM 11 points [-]

Utility functions are really bad match for human preferences, and one of the major premises we accept is wrong.

They may be a bad descriptive match. But in prescriptive terms, how do you "help" someone without a utility function?

Comment author: MichaelBishop 04 June 2009 06:27:57PM *  2 points [-]

Furthermore, utility functions actually aren't too bad as a descriptive match when you are primarily concerned about aggregate outcomes. They may be almost useless when you try to write one that describes your own choices and preferences perfectly, but they are a good enough approximation that they are useful for understanding how the choices of individuals aggregate: see the discipline of economics. This is a good place for the George Box quote: "All models are wrong, but some are useful."