1/ It’s not that rationality doesn’t work; it’s that it works for reasons completely different from the ones it claims.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
2/ The reason this matters is that rationality’s failure modes are not the ones rationalists expect.
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
3/ Rationalists’ expected failure modes: parameter uncertainty, incomplete information of known types, insufficient computation power, etc.
1 reply 3 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
4/ Rationality actually works through intelligent interpretation of inherently ambiguous rules in concrete but ambiguous situations.
2 replies 6 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
This is not how I understand rationality to work.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Jayarava
Yes; it takes quite a long explanation to see why the usual story is wrong, and another for the right one.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Citing one or two studies might do it. Humans are typically bad at solo reasoning tasks - *much* worse than random guessing!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Jayarava
That’s part of it! But rationalists would say “yeah, we know people are imperfectly rational, but they SHOULD be rational,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
“because rationality guarantees correctness.” But it doesn’t, so when it fails, they flail.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @Jayarava
Understanding why it works when it does helps avoid the cases where it doesn’t.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.