= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
torekp comments on Rationality Reading Group: Part P: Reductionism 101 - 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 (2)
Righting a Wrong Question is indeed a great trick, but not so simple. It can take a lot of tries to get a right question. You can even, sometimes, make things worse when you try to replace one set of terms (e.g., about external world events) with another allegedly more epistemically primitive set (e.g., about subjective perceptions). Philosophy is a bitch.
Interesting. Suppose we select a random bunch of questions and do that. Are we likely to make things better or worse? Was Eliezer's example specifically chosen to make it work? I have no idea.