You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Will_Newsome comments on Exclude the supernatural? My worldview is up for grabs. - Less Wrong Discussion

24 Post author: r_claypool 25 June 2011 03:46AM

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

Comments (92)

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

Comment author: Will_Newsome 26 June 2011 03:50:04AM *  0 points [-]

(logical?)

I do not know what to call this kind of evidence outside of technical decision theory discussion. "Logical" is the obvious choice, and that's the decision theory name for it, but it's only 'logical' in an abstract way. Maybe it's the most accurate word though, and I'm just not familiar with the etymology. "Platonic evidence" (or evidence) feels a little more accurate to me, 'cuz you can talk about an observation carrying both physical evidence and Platonic evidence without thinking that Platonic evidence entails having to perform explicit logical operations or anything like that. (Likewise you can resolve Platonic uncertainty without recourse to anything that looks like formal logic.) Eh, whatever, "logical uncertainty" is fine. (Related words: acausal, timeless, teleological.)