You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Kaj_Sotala comments on Open Thread, May 25 - May 31, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 25 May 2015 12:00AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (301)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 25 May 2015 03:50:29PM 6 points [-]

Oh, huh, umm. I certainly didn't want to cause anyone panic attacks by writing that, though in retrospect I should have realized that it's a bit of an information hazard.

I'm sorry.

If it's any comfort, I feel that my arguments in that article are pretty plausible, but that predicting the future is such a difficult thing filled with unknown unknowns that the vast majority of "pretty plausible" predictions are going to be wrong.

Comment author: Eitan_Zohar 25 May 2015 07:01:27PM *  3 points [-]

That's a bit of an oxymoron, but thanks for saying it. I'm calmer than I was in the morning and your argument seems less convincing also. I think the 'singleton' is the natural course of intelligent evolution, and fits the whole idea of AI.

Comment author: MrMind 26 May 2015 07:21:22AM 0 points [-]

your argument seems less convincing also.

What a weird thing!

Comment author: RichardKennaway 26 May 2015 11:30:18AM 4 points [-]

your argument seems less convincing also.

What a weird thing!

The convincingness of an idea can depend very much on one's mood. This is obvious in cases of clinical depression, but I think it is present in ordinary mental functioning as well. We tend to judge convincingness by narrative coherence rather than logic and evidence. The coherence is not just the coherence internal to the story, but its coherence with one's own feelings and experiences. As the latter change, so does the convincingness of the story.

Hypothesis: Ideas that retain their convincingness in the long term do so not by being especially rigorously argued or supported by solid evidence, but by constituting a large enough, coherent enough story to crowd out influence from day to day experience. It is the experience that will be interpreted in the light of the story rather than the other way round.

Comment author: MrMind 27 May 2015 09:59:59AM 0 points [-]

Ideas that retain their convincingness in the long term do so not by being especially rigorously argued or supported by solid evidence, but by constituting a large enough, coherent enough story to crowd out influence from day to day experience

I think religions fit the bill pretty nicely.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 27 May 2015 09:14:01PM 0 points [-]

I think religions fit the bill pretty nicely.

I think pop science does as well.