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.

roystgnr comments on The Number Choosing Game: Against the existence of perfect theoretical rationality - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: casebash 29 January 2016 01:04AM

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

Comments (151)

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

Comment author: Usul 05 January 2016 04:17:11AM 1 point [-]

There exists an irrational number which is 100 minus delta where delta is infinitesimally small. In my celestial language we call it "Bob". I choose Bob. Also I name the person who recognizes that the increase in utility between a 9 in the googleplex decimal place and a 9 in the googleplex+1 decimal place is not worth the time it takes to consider its value, and who therefore goes out to spend his utility on blackjack and hookers displays greater rationality than the person who does not.

Seriously, though, isn't this more of an infinity paradox rather than an indictment on perfect rationality? There are areas where the ability to mathematically calculate breaks down, ie naked singularities, Uncertainty Principle, as well as infinity. Isn't this more the issue at hand: that we can't be perfectly rational where we can't calculate precisely?

Comment author: roystgnr 06 January 2016 01:30:51AM 0 points [-]

There exists an irrational number which is 100 minus delta where delta is infinitesimally small.

Just as an aside, no there isn't. Infinitesimal non-zero numbers can be defined, but they're "hyperreals", not irrationals.