“Popper’s idea that there is only falsification and no such thing as confirmation turns out to be incorrect.”
No, that is still correct. Even if you only probabilistically falsify hypotheses, you can only FAIL TO DISCONFIRM/FALSIFY hypotheses. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SUCH THING AS CONFIRMATION.
You can NEVER, EVER get more certain about something just because you fail to get less certain of it, UNLESS there are a set of MECE hypotheses, in which case getting more certain one is wrong IS getting more certain the other(s) are right.
Since you don’t seem to be getting it from the downvotes but are still leaving comments, I will be blunt: your comments are bad because they consist purely of lazy low-effort assertions that add nothing to anything and convey an attitude of uninterest in becoming less wrong because you are certain you are already wholly right. No one here cares who you are such that your mere assertion is interesting, nor does anyone care what you think is “is bullshit”, nor is capslock cruise control for cool. You aren’t even making particularly novel assertions overall—eg. most people on LW interested in the topic think ego depletion is pretty dubious at this point (as you would know if you had bothered to take a few seconds to search the site instead of reading 13 year old posts).
LOL, I don’t care about downvotes, and I capitalize for emphasis, not to appear “cool” to accounts in cyberspace. I don’t care if you think my comments are “bad”. My comments are either right or wrong. It doesn’t matter whether you or anyone thinks they’re good/bad. It doesn’t matter whether you or anyone upvotes/downvotes them.
My assertions are CORRECT, and counter to Eliezer. That’s reason enough to make them.
Not sure why you’re mentioning ego depletion, but it’s not “dubious”, it’s something without any substantial evidence it exists. The existence of the celestial teapot isn’t “dubious”, just like the existence of pseudoscience like willpower depletion isn’t “dubious”. We (rational minds) have a duty to not even consider not-real things until we get sufficient evidence.
I’m re-reading the whole site. That a post is 13 years old is irrelevant. All the assertions in posts, new and old, need to be true. We’re on LW, after all.
“Popper’s idea that there is only falsification and no such thing as confirmation turns out to be incorrect.”
No, that is still correct. Even if you only probabilistically falsify hypotheses, you can only FAIL TO DISCONFIRM/FALSIFY hypotheses. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SUCH THING AS CONFIRMATION.
You can NEVER, EVER get more certain about something just because you fail to get less certain of it, UNLESS there are a set of MECE hypotheses, in which case getting more certain one is wrong IS getting more certain the other(s) are right.
Since you don’t seem to be getting it from the downvotes but are still leaving comments, I will be blunt: your comments are bad because they consist purely of lazy low-effort assertions that add nothing to anything and convey an attitude of uninterest in becoming less wrong because you are certain you are already wholly right. No one here cares who you are such that your mere assertion is interesting, nor does anyone care what you think is “is bullshit”, nor is capslock cruise control for cool. You aren’t even making particularly novel assertions overall—eg. most people on LW interested in the topic think ego depletion is pretty dubious at this point (as you would know if you had bothered to take a few seconds to search the site instead of reading 13 year old posts).
LOL, I don’t care about downvotes, and I capitalize for emphasis, not to appear “cool” to accounts in cyberspace. I don’t care if you think my comments are “bad”. My comments are either right or wrong. It doesn’t matter whether you or anyone thinks they’re good/bad. It doesn’t matter whether you or anyone upvotes/downvotes them.
My assertions are CORRECT, and counter to Eliezer. That’s reason enough to make them.
Not sure why you’re mentioning ego depletion, but it’s not “dubious”, it’s something without any substantial evidence it exists. The existence of the celestial teapot isn’t “dubious”, just like the existence of pseudoscience like willpower depletion isn’t “dubious”. We (rational minds) have a duty to not even consider not-real things until we get sufficient evidence.
I’m re-reading the whole site. That a post is 13 years old is irrelevant. All the assertions in posts, new and old, need to be true. We’re on LW, after all.