This article by @lukeprog cites more of the relevant decision science literature and does a more thorough job of explaining what they mean by rationality:https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/hR92kW2ZSvmuca5Nf/improving-human-rationality-through-cognitive-change-intro …
-
-
So relativize the "shortest path" to a metric, like all preference orderings on options are relativized to a utility function. These ideas are technically straightforward, and if somebody manages to shoot themselves in the psychological foot, I would not blame the theory.
-
Right: in order to apply any rational method, you first have to fix the ontological parameters (e.g. metric of goodness). My objection to rationalism is that it doesn’t want to look at the “meta-rational” process whereby you make those ontological choices.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Maybe that is the criteria you are looking for? When confronted with an unknown or conflicting ontology, a rationalist would like to have a single method by which to unify the models. But reality is layered and different perspectives are extremely useful for thinking.
-
rationality: belief that there is a single absolute ontology. meta-rationality: belief that there are multiple, equally valid, unconnected, though not conflicting, ontologies.
End of conversation
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.