= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Manfred comments on Does evolution select for mortality? - 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 (55)
Because there are so many things, people are going to get many things wrong.
Though I agree that as soon as someone starts thinking that one of the options is "incomprehensible," they're probably not going to think very clearly from there on out.
I just tried ctrl+F here and at the linked thread - who used the word "incomprehensible" and where?
You have successfully figured out that nobody used the word incomprehensible in the reddit thread :)
I was only attempting to mindread - sorry for poor use of quotes.
Perhaps interestingly, my model here is the reverse of my model for humans failing at hypotheticals: if you ask people to consider the hypothetical where punching kittens is a good idea for some low-probability reason, and ask them what they'd do about it, they can't do it properly. It's not in the design specs of their brain. Similarly, if someone encounters the same feeling of finding it hard to think about something, I suspect they conflate that with it being a hypothetical of low probability.