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.

DanielLC comments on Rationality and Winning - Less Wrong Discussion

19 Post author: lukeprog 04 May 2012 06:31PM

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

Comments (83)

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

Comment author: DanielLC 04 May 2012 09:03:49PM *  0 points [-]

The definitions I've seen on here are (paraphrased):

  • Epistemic Rationality: Ability to find truth in a wide variety of environments

  • Instrumental Rationality: Ability to alter reality to fit your desires in a wide variety of environments

Work ethic and akrasia are part of epistemic rationality, in that they affect your ability to find the truth, but once you figure out what you need to do, any akrasia in actually doing it is strictly instrumental.

Comment author: eurg 05 May 2012 04:03:55PM 1 point [-]

I may be misreading this, but it seems to me that you inverted the meaning of akrasia.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 05 May 2012 04:50:36PM *  1 point [-]

After careful reading, my understanding is that DanielLC is saying:

"Akrasia generally harms your instrumental rationality only. Except that you need some basic knowledge to bootstrap your epistemic rationality -- and if akrasia prevents you from ever learning this, then it has directly harmed your epistemic rationality, too."

as a reply to JGWeissman saying:

"If you know akrasia harms you significantly, and you don't make solving this problem your high priority, you are not even epistemically rational!"

Which, by the way, made me realize that I really am not epistemically rational enough. :(

Comment author: JGWeissman 05 May 2012 06:38:14PM 2 points [-]

as a reply to JGWeissman saying:

"If you know akrasia harms you significantly, and you don't make solving this problem your high priority, you are not even epistemically rational!"

More like, "If you know akrasia harms you significantly, and you don't make solving this problem your high priority, then it doesn't matter if you are epistemically rational because it's not helping you be (instrumentally) rational."

"Rationality" by itself should refer to instrumental rationality. Epistemic rationality is tool of instrumental rationality. Despite these concepts being described as different adjectives modifying the same noun, it is suboptimal to think of them as different aspects of the same category. Epistemic rationality belongs in a category with other tools of rationality, such as actually choosing what you know you should choose.

Comment author: DanielLC 05 May 2012 06:32:24PM 0 points [-]

Fixed.

I know what it means; I just wrote the sentence wrong.

Comment author: DanielLC 05 May 2012 06:23:54PM -1 points [-]

Whoops. Fixed.

I know what it means, I just typed it wrong.

Comment author: DanielLC 05 May 2012 06:21:26PM -1 points [-]

Whoops. Fixed.

I know what it means, I just typed it wrong.