I’m quite sure they do. Right now I can’t think of a philosopher who is as imposing to me as (the late) E.T. Jaynes is. Unless you count people like Judea Pearl who also do AI research, that is. :)
But that doesn’t mean that mainstream philosophers never make useful and original contributions on all kinds of subjects relevant to Less Wrong and even to friendly AI.
Right now I can’t think of a philosopher who is as imposing to me as (the late) E.T. Jaynes is. Unless you count people like Judea Pearl who also do AI research, that is.
That (Jaynes) is a pretty high standard. But not impossibly high. As candidates, I would mention Jaakko Hintikka, Per Martin-Lof and the late David Lewis. If you are allowed to count economists, then I would also mention game theorists like Aumann, Binmore, and the late John Harsanyi. And if you allow philosophically inclined physicists like Jaynes, there are quite a few folks worth mentioning.
If so, I don’t think he can maintain that position consistently, since he has already benefited from the work of many mainstream philosophers, and continues to do so—for example Bostrom on anthropic reasoning.
I’m quite sure they do. Right now I can’t think of a philosopher who is as imposing to me as (the late) E.T. Jaynes is. Unless you count people like Judea Pearl who also do AI research, that is. :)
But that doesn’t mean that mainstream philosophers never make useful and original contributions on all kinds of subjects relevant to Less Wrong and even to friendly AI.
That (Jaynes) is a pretty high standard. But not impossibly high. As candidates, I would mention Jaakko Hintikka, Per Martin-Lof and the late David Lewis. If you are allowed to count economists, then I would also mention game theorists like Aumann, Binmore, and the late John Harsanyi. And if you allow philosophically inclined physicists like Jaynes, there are quite a few folks worth mentioning.
I’d never heard of Per Martin-Lof, thanks.
I of course am not definitive here, but I strongly suspect that from EY’s perspective it means precisely that.
If so, I don’t think he can maintain that position consistently, since he has already benefited from the work of many mainstream philosophers, and continues to do so—for example Bostrom on anthropic reasoning.