LESSWRONG
LW

All of ThisDan's Comments + Replies

Narrative, self-image, and self-communication
ThisDan10

I guess i don't "want" myself to do anything. I don't decide what is right in advance because if i do anything to predetermine my answer before a question arises then i'm starting off with a bias.

In a way what i'm saying is 1+1 could equal 2 tomorrow (which it can't) and I will still probably get the answer right because i didn't decide to stick with the answer 1+1=2 before the question was asked (therefore before this mysterious universe switched the answer).

I'll sound completely biased and unbelievable when i say this but i'll say it anyway- i... (read more)

Reply
4Academian
+1 for sharing; you seem the sort of person my post is aimed at: so averse to being constrained by self-image that you turn a blind eye when it affects you. It sounds to me like you that you are actively trying to suppress having beliefs about yourself: I've been there, and I can think of a number of possible causes of this aversion: Possibility #1: You see that other people are biased by their self-images in harmful ways, so you try not to have any self image that might resemble one that they would have. What you end up with is something like a "moral calculator" self-image, or a "really objective guy" self-image: This distinguishes you from others in a way that doesn't activate your "don't screw up like them" alarm bells. Possibility #2. You are mildly disgusted by human biases and limitations, and find using the story-like heuristics of "common people" quaint but distasteful. This gives you a "too good for that silly human-think" self-image, which biases you to ignore methods of thinking that are especially useful for humans if employed correctly (i.e., as moderate-bias-high-accuracy estimators). No one is saying go think like all your wrong friends now or stop having real-time assessments of things, and the fact that you interpreted the post in that way suggests that you are somewhat sensitive to this issue. I'm saying to spend some time understanding the strengths of common emotional heuristics like narrative, not just their weaknesses, so you can make a better decision about when and how to use them. One final comment: It should. This should also throw up a red flag: You are not going to escape having to cache some of your thoughts. Computers do it, AIs are going to do it, people do it, and you do it. When I learned linear algebra, I made myself re-derive every theorem and its dependencies, back to the field axioms, in my head every time I used them... but eventually I had to stop in order to follow seminar talks that'll use 5 major results results in a
2MaoShan
Okay, I guess that makes you the first member of the Vocal Opposition. I am not going to try to deny your subjective assessment of your own mental processes, but even in the event that you are capable of judging a situation from the ground up every moment of your life, surely you must be aware that very few other current humans share this ability. The only reason that I can see for your opposing this idea would be to maintain your superiority by preventing access to a simpler method which would work nearly as well. I suspect that the favorable traits in your personality as your independent research has reported would disappear with a larger sampling size, as well.
The Ultimate Source
ThisDan00

Yes and the unconscious comes from where? The input from the deterministic universe. So if unconscious is the exoself then the exoself is just the universe- not "you" or anyone at all. It is just is.

Reply
Narrative, self-image, and self-communication
ThisDan10

But you are saying I don't exist.

No i'm not perfect and I have biases come to my attention and fly under the radar etc- but I don't ask myself what I would do. I don't ask myself what someone else would do. I literally have no role models and can't think of any I ever had. I do make decisions as they come up and if I ever was to base one off the fact that "that's what Dan would do" then that throws up a red flag to me. It says ask the question again and find a real answer because maybe I don't have a real reason.

What you are describing to me sounds like a short cut to a nasty bias that self perpetuates- telling you to never question anything just follow the status quo.

Reply
3MaoShan
What the narratives would do would be to give you time to consider those situations and resolutions without actually being forced to do so on the spot. If you read it and understand that it is what you would want yourself to do in that situation, then you will have that solution on hand without your extensive on-the-spot calculations. If you think the resolution you just read in the Least Wrong was complete crap, then you would try to figure out what a better solution would be, again without the time-pressure. DO question the status quo, if you disagree with it. The point is to make them so good that you wouldn't disagree to begin with, and would be happy to have the help that (mortals not blessed with infinite and instantaneous cognitive resources) could use in uncommon but important decisions.
Narrative, self-image, and self-communication
ThisDan00

You don't have to calculate every single factor from scratch. You can use "this is what i ate yesterday" and "last week this diet made me feel good" rather than start from scratch. For example you can take for given that you don't have to calculate if you are still on earth or not to decide what to eat. Using data of recalled past experience and keeping already collected data such as food nutrition is ALOT different then asking "What would X do?". Even while using this stored data, as you start to apply it you can ask a quick... (read more)

Reply
4Vaniver
This post is about deliberately choosing your self-image, with the implication that it can and should change sometimes. Notice that choosing between standing policies is actually different from separately choosing independent actions, and those two situations can lead to different choices.
Narrative, self-image, and self-communication
ThisDan20

Question: What is 1 + 1 Answer: "what would jesus do?"....

Not helpful is it... Wouldn't it be better to have a cognitive model that knows how to process data rather than reaching for the cheat button?

Even if the question was "If a man was drowning etc etc" the answer "what would jesus do?" is never going to be as effective as having a data processor that can custom build an answer for the exact question...which isn't what X would do but what is the right answer.

Reply
6MaoShan
Yes, that would be ideal, but a current human brain is not going to work for that. Until there is practical brain augmentation or otherwise accessible advanced AI, a set of role-models would help.
Narrative, self-image, and self-communication
ThisDan-20

Self image is just another word for bias.

I am an X. X's always do X things. I have to do x things

Why can't people make calculations in real time rather than inserting a pre-made stand in? For example: Problem: a circle of paper with a diameter of 3cm is required Answer: grab an already constructed circle and hope it fits or Answer: note the size requirement for the paper and construct one out of new material so it fits perfectly

which is like

Problem: A man is fleeing from a large mob and hides in a location you know. The mob catches up and ask if you seen ... (read more)

Reply
6Academian
This is a straw-manning of the use of narrative, i.e. over-using it. Try steel-manning it, which is the point of the post. For example, take this observation: Indeed. And biased filters are sometimes good; e.g. google "bias variance tradeoff", or read it about it here or here. In particular, biased estimators are often more accurate than unbiased onces due to having less variance. I think use of narrative schema and other thick concepts as literal examples of this. The trick is using them wisely, instead of always or never.
5Vaniver
Oftentimes, nothing has changed in the relevant period. Recomputing from scratch which diet is best for me- including rereading all of the relevant research- every time I think about food seems like a terrible idea. Looking at the research, picking a diet for myself, and saying "this is me until I re-evaluate in three months," seems like a good idea. You have limited time to think; use it wisely!
The Allais Paradox
ThisDan20

I was really confused about what point EY made that went over my head but i think I get it now.

It totally changes the game to play it infinite amount of times rather than 1 go to win or lose. I made my choices based on 1 game and not a hybrid between the two of them played multiple times.

If I play once, choosing 1a is just taking money that's already mine. If I play infinite times, 1b earns money faster because failing can be evened out.

Reply
The Allais Paradox
ThisDan50

That's exactly how i felt too.

"Don't gamble" is the key. 1a allowed me to indulge that even if i was boxed into being in the game.

So in question 2 I want to follow "don't gamble" but both are gambling. Additionally, both gambles would feel the same risk to most human who didn't record statistics (other than subconscious and normal memory effected observations) so could be cheaply rounded off to say they are the same. If they are "the same" but 1 pays more money...

Oh one more point "easy come easy go". If you can lose... (read more)

Reply
The Allais Paradox
ThisDan60

Ok that is exactly my line of thinking and why i can't understand the broader point of this argument.

Yes I can see the statistical similarity that makes it "the same"- but the situation is totally different in that one offers "certain win or risk" and the other is "risk vs risk" with a barely noticeable difference between them.

So my decision on both questions goes like this 1a > 1b because even if i was offered MUCH less, i'd still likely take that deciding that i'm not greedy and free money always feels good but giving aw... (read more)

Reply
0[anonymous]
I seem to agree with you, but I think how you arrived to 11.12% is wrong. Did you divide 3000/27000? You can´t do that, since you won´t have 27000 unless you get those 3000 dollar extra. Shouldn´t you do 3000/24000 = 12,5%?
By Which It May Be Judged
ThisDan00

I just went to reply you but after reading back on what was said I'm seeing a different context. My stupid comment was about popularity not about usefulness. I was rambling about general public opinion on belief systems not what the topic was really about- if philosophy could move something forward.

Reply
By Which It May Be Judged
ThisDan-10

There is mileage in philosophy? Says you. Are you talking about in context of general population of a country? Of "intellectuals? Your mates?

If philosophy has mileage (compared to science) then so does any other religion. I guess that's all dualism is though.

[This comment is no longer endorsed by its author]Reply
0MugaSofer
Eh?