ISTM that we could summarize Eliezer’s post, conclusions, subsequent discussion, and much previous LW material thus: “there are no reliable epistemic shortcuts”.
I was wondering if there was a top level post explicitly about the need to have tools for checking the territory now and then because your map is necessarily incomplete.
The messy thing is that you need to have tools and habits for being able to notice it when reality is tugging on your sleeve or bashing you about the head and trying to find out what important thing you’ve missed—but if you formalize that procedure, you’re in a map again.
I disagree. Some surface features do correlate exceedingly well with epistemic rationality; it’s just harder to rule out false positives than false negatives.
ISTM that we could summarize Eliezer’s post, conclusions, subsequent discussion, and much previous LW material thus: “there are no reliable epistemic shortcuts”.
I was wondering if there was a top level post explicitly about the need to have tools for checking the territory now and then because your map is necessarily incomplete.
The messy thing is that you need to have tools and habits for being able to notice it when reality is tugging on your sleeve or bashing you about the head and trying to find out what important thing you’ve missed—but if you formalize that procedure, you’re in a map again.
I disagree. Some surface features do correlate exceedingly well with epistemic rationality; it’s just harder to rule out false positives than false negatives.