= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Bound_up comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, March 2015, chapter 114 + chapter 115 - 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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (423)
I know, right!?
I feel this is a glorious moment. Reductionism, consistency, causation. These are hallmarks of rationality and of the Methods thereof.
Anybody with sufficient understanding of the situation should be able to deduce the outcome, because it is dependably going to be whatever the rational answer is! Decision Theory allows us to identify the best course for a certain set of values and goals, and the rational answer will be the same for everyone.
That this actually worked is a sign of the very tight internal consistency of the story. That this would almost never work in any other story is a powerful indicator of the opposite.
Nitpick: It doesn't matter how much or how little understanding; as long as you specify the knowledge available just as you specify the vallues/goals, then everybody still gets the same rational answer. An answer that they'll be happier with if they start with better understanding, but a rational answer all the same.
Was the 'strand of silver/litres of blood' line something Harry knew, though, or was it just textual?