How Does Veritula Work?

Showing only ideas leading to #5094 and its comments.

See full discussion​·​See most recent related ideas
  Log in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.

Discussions can branch out indefinitely. You may need to scroll sideways.
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
5th of 5 versions leading to #5094 (6 total)

Rational Decision-Making

Expanding on #2112

If an idea, as written, has no pending criticisms, it’s rational to adopt it and irrational to reject it. What reason could you have to reject it? If it has no pending criticisms, then either 1) no reasons to reject it (ie, criticisms) have been suggested or 2) all suggested reasons have been addressed already.

If an idea, as written, does have pending criticisms, it’s irrational to adopt it and rational to reject it – by reference to those criticisms. What reason could you have to ignore the pending criticisms and adopt it anyway?

Or, simplified:

It is rational to adopt only those ideas which, as written, don’t have pending criticisms, and to reject ideas that do.

Battle-tested
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Only version leading to #5094 (2 total)

What reason could you have to ignore the pending criticisms and adopt [the criticized idea] anyway?

Maybe the criticisms aren’t decisive.

Criticism of #4902Criticized5*
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar

To incorporate some notion of decisiveness or severity, we need to be prepared to program that into our decision-making tool. I’m not aware that anyone knows how to programmatically determine the severity or decisiveness of a criticism, and I suspect outsourcing it to the user would result in the same unintended behavior we saw with the sliders for hard to vary.

Criticism of #2138Criticized1*
Sam Cymbaluk’s avatar

An inability to improve on the criticized aspect of a system is not a refutation of that criticism.

Criticism of #4711
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar

Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but if somebody suggests some system they can’t put into practice, then the system is no good.

Criticism of #5086Criticized1
Sam Cymbaluk’s avatar

if somebody suggests some system they can’t put into practice, then the system is no good.

Agreed. My point is that you can't refute a flaw by saying the flaw doesn't have a workable system to resolve it. "Your boat has a hole in it". "Yeah, well I don't have any way of fixing it". That doesn't resolve the criticism of the boat. If it's unfixable and a real flaw, you might just need a new boat.

Criticism of #5094
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar

To be clear, the boat represents the idea that we should judge criticisms by their strength?