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.

Lumifer comments on The Sally-Anne fallacy - Less Wrong Discussion

27 Post author: philh 11 April 2016 01:06PM

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

Comments (27)

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

Comment author: roystgnr 12 April 2016 08:38:30PM *  0 points [-]

This looks like a special case of a failure of intentionality. If a child knows where the marble is, they've managed first-order intentionality, but if they don't realize that Sally doesn't know where the marble is, they've failed at second order.

The orders go higher, though, and it's not obvious how much higher humans can naturally go. If

Bob thinks about "What does Alice think about Bob?" and on rare occasions "What does Alice think Bob thinks about Alice?" but will not organically reason "What does Alice think Bob thinks about Alice's model of Bob?"

then Bob can handle second and third but can't easily handle fourth order intentionality.

It may be a useful writing skill to be comfortable with intentionality at one level higher than your audience.

Comment author: Lumifer 12 April 2016 08:46:18PM 1 point [-]

but will not organically reason "What does Alice think Bob thinks about Alice's model of Bob?"

That's actually pretty easy: Alice doesn't :-)

Obligatory reference: Battle of Wits.