= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FiftyTwo comments on Exploiting the Typical Mind Fallacy for more accurate questioning? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (72)
An example of this used as a textbook signal for abusive relationships is that people who frequently accuse partners of being unfaithful without evidence are generally those who are cheating themselves or have cheated in the past.
I would guess that people who were cheated upon by their former partners also have increased the prior probability of someone cheating on them.
That's generally the problem with this type of reasoning. A strategy used to find a perpetrator by exploring familiarity with the crime, may also find a victim. If you overestimate the probability of people stealing, you may be a thief... or a victim of theft.
Is it true that people who frequently accuse partners of infidelity have been significantly less faithful than people who don't?