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.

Kaj_Sotala comments on [Link] Nerds are nuts - Less Wrong Discussion

25 [deleted] 07 June 2012 07:48AM

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

Comments (44)

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

Comment author: David_Gerard 07 June 2012 10:45:55AM 11 points [-]

The dangers of decompartmentalising toxic waste have been covered here before: Phil Goetz's classic Reason as memetic immune disorder. Vladimir Nesov hypothesises that this is why humans compartmentalise.

In the skepticsphere, decompartmentalising stupidity is considered the best hypothesis to explain the Salem hypothesis: that if a creationist touts scientific expertise in a supporter, said supporter is likely an engineer. But engineers in general are notorious for this sort of thing.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 09 June 2012 07:22:11AM 3 points [-]

Also related: The bullet-swallowers by Scott Aaronson.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 June 2012 04:07:15PM 2 points [-]

Because I can't write a comment there, I will write it here:

Comment #19 by IceBogan:
Interesting comparison. But you can be Libertarian “in the neighborhood of x_0″ without accepting all the reductio ad absurdum arguments — you can vote for a little less government, a little lower taxes, a little more personal responsibility. You can’t be a little bit Many Worlds.

You can be "a little bit Many Worlds", and actually this is probably the most popular position -- that the microscopic particles have many possible histories, with complex amplitudes that sometimes cancel each other out, but as soon as you have too many particles (such as: enough to build a cat), it's no longer true.

A "Many little Worlds" would probably be a better name. Many little Worlds are acceptable for many bullet-dodgers, assuming that they later transform (collapse) into One big World.

Comment author: David_Gerard 09 June 2012 10:33:29AM *  2 points [-]

Yes, Being willing to swallow the bullet does not mean you are not, in fact, being very stupid indeed. Extrapolating beyond one's knowledge in this manner is using one's own ignorance as data. (Not that any agent can avoid judgement under uncertainty, but it's why this sort of extreme extrapolation can lead to crazy results.) Consistency is useful, but not a terminal value.