RSS

Ap­peal to Consequence

TagLast edit: 2 Mar 2021 17:49 UTC by abramdemski

An appeal to consequences is an argument against saying or believing something, which addresses external consequences of saying/​believing, rather than the truth of the matter. This creates a conflict between epistemic rationality and instrumental rationality (or at least, raises the possibility of such a conflict). The argument asks you to compromise the soundness of your map, for the sake of the territory. If you give in, you may be accepting a falsehood. If you refuse, you may be shooting yourself in the foot.

Dialogue on Ap­peals to Consequences

jessicata18 Jul 2019 2:34 UTC
33 points
82 comments7 min readLW link
(unstableontology.com)

Ap­peal to Con­se­quence, Value Ten­sions, And Ro­bust Organizations

Matt Goldenberg19 Jul 2019 22:09 UTC
45 points
90 comments5 min readLW link

Maybe Ly­ing Doesn’t Exist

Zack_M_Davis14 Oct 2019 7:04 UTC
59 points
57 comments8 min readLW link

Win­ning vs Truth – In­fo­haz­ard Trade-Offs

eapache7 Mar 2020 22:49 UTC
12 points
11 comments2 min readLW link

Pro­tected From Myself

Eliezer Yudkowsky19 Oct 2008 0:09 UTC
37 points
30 comments6 min readLW link
No comments.