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.

Riothamus comments on Powering Through vs Working Around - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: lifelonglearner 24 June 2016 07:42PM

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

Comments (7)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Riothamus 01 July 2016 06:03:04PM 0 points [-]

It is worth keeping in mind that how to defeat X is not well-defined. The usual method for circumventing the planning fallacy is to use whatever the final cost was last time. What about cases where there isn't a body of evidence for the costs? Rationality is just such a case; while we have many well-defined biases, we have few methods for overcoming them.

As a consequence, I determine whether to workaround or defeat X primarily based on how frequently I expect it to come up. The cost of X I find less relevant for two reasons: one, I have a preference against being mugged by Pascal's Wager into spending all my effort on low-likelihood events; two, high cost cases often have a well developed System 2 methodology to resolve them.

A benefit is that frequent cases benefit more easily from spaced repetition and habit forming. In this way, I hope to develop a body of past cases to refer to when trying to plan for how long defeating future X will take.

Examples of frequent cases: exercise, amazon purchases, reading articles. Examples of rare cases: job benefits, housing costs, vehicle purchases.