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.

Wei_Dai comments on Crazy Ideas Thread, Aug. 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: polymathwannabe 11 August 2015 01:24PM

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

Comments (240)

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

Comment author: Wei_Dai 12 August 2015 08:09:22PM *  1 point [-]

I wrote a post arguing that what is irrational overconfidence for an individual can be good for society. (In short, scientific knowledge is a public good, individual motivations to produce it is likely too low from a group perspective, and overconfidence increases individual motivation so it's good.)

To extend this a bit, if society pays people to produce scientific knowledge (in money and/or status), then overconfident people would be willing to accept a lower "salary" and outcompete more rational individuals for the available positions, so we should expect that most science is produced by overconfident people. (This also applies to any other attribute that increases motivation to work on scientific problems, like intellectual curiosity.) As a corollary, people who produce science about rationality (e.g., decision theorists) are probably more overconfident than average, people who work at MIRI are probably more overconfident than average, etc.

Comment author: Lumifer 12 August 2015 08:22:48PM 4 points [-]

This starts to look like Lake Woebegon.

The argument that overconfident people will be willing to accept lower compensation and so outcompete "more rational individuals" seems to be applicable very generally, from running a pizza parlour to working as a freelance programmer. So, is most everyone "more overconfident than average"?

Comment author: Wei_Dai 12 August 2015 09:01:05PM *  2 points [-]

Good point. :) I guess it actually has to be something more like "comparative overconfidence", i.e., confidence in your own scientific ideas or assessment of your general ability to produce scientific output, relative to confidence in your other skills. Theoretical science (including e.g., decision theory, FAI theory) has longer and weaker feedback cycles than most business fields like running a pizza parlor, so if you start off overconfident in general, you can probably keep your overconfidence in your scientific ideas/skills longer than your business ideas/skills.