Also, I think there’s an (unstated, and that should be fixed and the topic debated) belief that instrumental rationality without epistemic rationality is either useless or harmful.
I think some people agree with that, but I consider it backwards.
I’ll take winning over accurately predicting. Winning is the desired end; accurate prediction is a means, and not the only one.
I think some people agree with that, but I consider it backwards.
I’ll take winning over accurately predicting. Winning is the desired end; accurate prediction is a means, and not the only one.
Umm, that’s what I’m trying to say. If you don’t know what “winning” is, you don’t know whether your accurate predictions help you win or not.
Were you? I’m not seeing what you’re saying align with what I said.
On a perhaps related issue, you don’t need to know what winning is, to win.
Competence without comprehension, a la Dennett.
Sure, but that’s luck, not rationality.