Frontpage Posts

sorted by
magical scoring

This result has even stronger consequences than that the Linear Utility Hypothesis is false, namely that utility is bounded. Not necessary. You don't need to suppose bounded utility to explain rejecting Pascal's muggle. My reason for rejecting pascal muggle is this. If there exists a set of state...(read more)

My point is that for me, extinction is not equivalent to losing current amount of lives now. Human extinction now for me is worse than losing 10 trillion people, if the global population was 100 trillion. This is because extinction destroys all potential future utility. It destroys thw potential of...(read more)

This is a fine introduction to constructive logic. And, indeed, I suspect that constructive logic could be popular in this community, if it was better known.

Still, I don't really understand what the purpose of this series is. Your first post made some bold claims regarding what mathematics is (and...(read more)

Wonderful post! As I mentioned in the comments on Against the Linear Utility Hypothesis and the Leverage Penalty I am in the process of writing a reply to this as well, and about half of what I had planned to write was this. Thank you for writing this up better than I would have! I would like to add...(read more)

The question is, what do you mean by "independent thought"? If "independent thought" means "mistrust everyone" then clearly it can be a harmful heuristic. If "independent thought" means "use your own thinking faculties to process all evidence you have, including the evidence which consists of the ex...(read more)

That's a reasonable value judgement, but it's not what the Linear Utility Hypothesis would predict.

This post seems to conflate the "canonical perspective" and truth. Unfortunately, the canonical perspective can be and frequently is false. Furthermore, adhering to it makes it harder to correct it. Thus, one must balance the benefit of having a Schelling point for coordination against the benefit...(read more)

(Also, I'd like to thank Tessa Alexanian for providing comments on an earlier version of this post. Her advice is the reason this is at all coherent)

It seems like we're anchoring excessively on the question of sufficiency, when what matters is the net expected benefit. If we rephrase the question and ask "are there populations that are made worse off, on expectation, by more independent thought?", the answer is clearly yes, which is I think the ...(read more)

Personally, I'd be perfectly happy to say that our hypothetical hermit is doing mathematics despite the complete absence of social connections; but I wasn't endorsing the claim that mathematics is a social activity, merely explicating it. (And of course it's possible that my explication fails to mat...(read more)