= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JGWeissman comments on Yet Another "Rational Approach To Morality & Friendly AI Sequence" - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (59)
This is the simplification taught in science class, that perhaps scientists even tell themselves. Really though, most of the work is forming the hypothesis, and the social process of science only manages to protect itself from the dangers of forming hypotheses without that work by having norms of collecting lots of redundant data.
The original statement said nothing about how much work each step was. In fact, the original statement was refuting a statement that was even more simplistic and strongly implied the process was limited to just data and conclusions.
I agree with your second sentence.
Strictly speaking, if the data clearly supports a conclusion, why does it matter whether you predicted the conclusion or not? Assuming your goal was to learn about the data/conclusion, not to assess your own predictive power.