Definition of “rationalism” from the Eggplant book draft. If you identify as a rationalist, I’m curious whether you find this accurate, and if not, why not?pic.twitter.com/2cvo7478fj
Better ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—around problems of meaning and meaninglessness; self and society; ethics, purpose, and value.
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.
| Country | Code | For customers of |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 40404 | (any) |
| Canada | 21212 | (any) |
| United Kingdom | 86444 | Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2 |
| Brazil | 40404 | Nextel, TIM |
| Haiti | 40404 | Digicel, Voila |
| Ireland | 51210 | Vodafone, O2 |
| India | 53000 | Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance |
| Indonesia | 89887 | AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata |
| Italy | 4880804 | Wind |
| 3424486444 | Vodafone | |
| » See SMS short codes for other countries | ||
This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.
Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.
When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.
The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.
Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.
Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.
Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.
See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.
Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.
Definition of “rationalism” from the Eggplant book draft. If you identify as a rationalist, I’m curious whether you find this accurate, and if not, why not?pic.twitter.com/2cvo7478fj
Revised Lesswrong post, hopefully clearer than the FB post:https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/CPP2uLcaywEokFKQG/toolbox-thinking-and-law-thinking …
Awesome. Thanks. Looking forward to your response, @Meaningness
I took a quick look. Overall, it appears that neither of us feels the other is getting our respective points. I don’t think the LW post characterizes my pov accurately. This is puzzling, but seems difficult to sort out, and probably not important for either of us.
A side conversation developed a possible alternative crux: “Maybe @ESYudkowsky thinks (a) everyone has a True Objective Function, even if they aren't aware of it, or (b) everyone _ought_ to have an objective function and it's irrational not to have one.” And I disagree.
That seems off to me. I think @ESYudkowsky is saying something like — for any agent with a goal, then there exists, in theory, an objective means to asses the agent’s decision making procedure relative to an ideal (even if the ideal is unknown or uncomputable)
Yes… in the presence of conflicting goals, one would need an objective function (or something roughly equivalent) expressing how to trade them off. Otherwise the framework doesn’t apply.
Maybe I get you more with last tweet @Meaningness — you don’t see Actual Person as agent-with-a-goal, but pluralistic with sometimes conflicting goals; DT doesn’t apply holistically b/c Actual Person has no Actual Utility Function; your point more organismic than mathy — close?
Yes. All except the last bit: it’s true and important that people are apes, but that wasn’t the point here. If an “abstract agent” has incommensurable goals, DT doesn’t apply. “Organismic” doesn’t bear on the problem.
Caveat: I’ve studied only the mainstream version of DT; there may be extensions that handle incommensurable goals in limited cases, I don’t know. I can’t see how one could handle the general case (but who knows, maybe I’m missing something and there’s an extension that does).
Cool! To clarify, you’re point is about the nature of the agent, not about math? The agent has no actual utility function, ya?
The point is that the math doesn’t apply unless/until you identify actions, outcomes, and preferences. Those are abstract entities; they are not objective features of the world.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.