= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jiro comments on Leaving LessWrong for a more rational life - 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 (268)
I think it's a pretty big assumption to assume that fictional stories typically do those things correctly. Fictional stories are, after all, produced by people with agendas. If the proportion of fictional stories with plausible but incorrect deductions, reminders, or reflections is big enough, even your ability to figure out which ones are correct might not make it worthwhile to use fiction this way.
(Consider an extreme case where you can correctly assess 95% of the time whether a fictional deduction, reminder, or reflection is correct, but they are incorrect at a 99% rate. You'd have about a 4/5 chance of being wrong if you update based on fiction.)
Agreed; you'd have to figure all of that out separately. For what it's worth, given the selection of fictional stories I'm usually exposed to and decide to read, I think they're generally positive value (though probably not the best in terms of opportunity cost.)