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.

Pavitra comments on Bayesian justice - Less Wrong Discussion

18 Post author: gwern 26 July 2011 12:58AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (23)
Tags: applied bayesian rationality crime current_affairs evpsych practical psychology

Comments (23)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Pavitra 26 July 2011 05:08:33AM 1 point [-]

There's more to justice than empiricism. You have to use decision theory.

Comment author: komponisto 26 July 2011 05:55:44AM 6 points [-]

Decision theory is for policymakers, not jurors. The latter should be concerned exclusively with epistemic calculation.

(At least that's how the system is supposed to work.)

Comment author: randallsquared 28 July 2011 01:25:03AM 0 points [-]

Jurors sometimes have to rule based on how the law ought to be, rather than how it is.

Comment author: komponisto 28 July 2011 08:18:03AM 1 point [-]

"Have to"? It's not even universally agreed that jury nullification is permissible, let alone obligatory.

Comment author: timtyler 26 July 2011 07:40:02AM 0 points [-]

What about "jury requests"?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit