Worth noting that this was written before Eliezer's "Toolbox-thinking and Law-thinking"; several LW commenters seem to feel that that the T-T & L-T post addresses the criticisms in this post (based on the comments at https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/gsQjde3qeZw36arYE/nostalgebraist-bayes-a-kinda-sorta-masterpost … ).
-
-
-
I disagree that this answers my criticisms. In particular, my section 7 argues that it's practically unfeasible to even write down most belief/decision problems in the form that the Bayesian laws require, so "were the laws followed" is generally not even *well-defined*.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It just occured to me that rationalisms are kind of deontological epistemologies. Not only the business of trying to reduce cognition to adherence to rules but also emotional dynamics seems similar. Does it make sense to you?
-
Hmm, I’m not sure… say more, maybe? Bayesian rationalism is similar to utilitarianism, formally. I can’t make any sense of critical rationalism, but maybe it’s similar to virtue ethics?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’m probably missing the point here but there are plenty of puzzles with solutions that are unsolvable regardless of endless compiting power , see Yanofskyhttps://mitpress.mit.edu/books/outer-limits-reason …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.