You seem to have used the words ‘heuristic’ and ‘intuition’ to refer to terminal values (eg. a utility function) and perhaps occam priors, as opposed to the usually understood meaning “a computationally tractable approximation to the correct decision making process (full bayesian updating or whatever)”. It looks like you and lukeprog actually agree on everything that is relevant, but without generating any feeling of agreement. As I see it, you said something like “but such an agent won’t do anything without an occam prior and terminal values”, to which lukeprog responded “but clearly anything you can do with an approximation you can do with full bayesian updating and decision theory”.
Basically, I suggest you Taboo “intuition” and “heuristic” (and/or read over your own posts with “computationally tractable approximation” substituted for “intuition” and “heuristic”, to see what lukeprog thinks is ‘obviously false’).
You seem to have used the words ‘heuristic’ and ‘intuition’ to refer to terminal values (eg. a utility function) and perhaps occam priors, as opposed to the usually understood meaning “a computationally tractable approximation to the correct decision making process (full bayesian updating or whatever)”. It looks like you and lukeprog actually agree on everything that is relevant, but without generating any feeling of agreement. As I see it, you said something like “but such an agent won’t do anything without an occam prior and terminal values”, to which lukeprog responded “but clearly anything you can do with an approximation you can do with full bayesian updating and decision theory”.
Basically, I suggest you Taboo “intuition” and “heuristic” (and/or read over your own posts with “computationally tractable approximation” substituted for “intuition” and “heuristic”, to see what lukeprog thinks is ‘obviously false’).
Thank you for that, I will check over it.