Anatoly_Vorobey comments on Explanations for Less Wrong articles that you didn't understand - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (118)
I still haven't found a readable meta-overview of causation. What I would love to be able to read is a 3-10 pages article that answers these questions: what is causation, why our intuitive feeling that "A causes B" is straightforward to understand is naive (some examples), why nevertheless "A causes B" is fundamental and should be studied, what disciplines are interested in answering that question, what are the main approaches (short descriptions with simple lucid examples), which of them are orthogonal/in conflict/cooperate with each other, example of how a rigorous definition of causality is useful in some other problem, major challenges in the field.
Before I'm able to digest such a summary (or ultimately construct it in my own head from other longer sources if I'm unable to find it), I remain confused by just about every theoretical discussion of causation - without at least a vague understanding of what's known, what's unknown, what's important and what's mainstream everything sounds a little sectarian.
1) Do you understand the standard story about the thermodynamic arrow of time? Wikipedia:
2) Do you understand the standard story about the smoking/tar/cancer example in Pearl's theory of causality? If not, here's a good explanation.
For anything more advanced than that, Ilya is probably your best bet :-)
1) yes 2) no, and I'll read through Nielsen's post, thanks. I've been postponing the task of actually reading Pearl's book.
I find the Socratic approach useful for bridging gaps, do you?