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.

djcb comments on Falsification - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: TheatreAddict 12 March 2012 03:59AM

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

Comments (39)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: djcb 13 March 2012 11:37:26AM 2 points [-]

The concept of 'living in the matrix' is only meaningful if there is some difference with not living in the matrix. Thus, there should be something, at least in principle, that we can observe. And based on this observation (or lack thereof) we can determine probabilities.

Regarding the 50%, suppose (for the sake of argument) that there really is some property of the universe that is either true or false, but we have no evidence whatsoever in either direction. Then the probability is simply unknown, not 50/50. Of course, as a Bayesian prior starting point, you can use 50%, but that is only a rule-of-thumb, and shouldn't import all the connotations of a "50%" in cases where we do have facts.