believing things that aren’t “true”, no matter how useful it may be to believe them
Why should a belief be true just because it’s useful? Or are you saying people are claiming a belief’s usefulness is not true despite the evidence that it’s useful?
Why should a belief be true just because it’s useful? Or are you saying people are claiming a belief’s usefulness is not true despite the evidence that it’s useful?
Neither. I’m saying that a popular attitude of LW culture is to prefer not to “believe” the thing it’s useful to believe, if there is any evidence the belief is not actually true, or often even if there is simply no peer-reviewed evidence explicitly associated with said belief.
For example, self-fulfilling prophecies and placebo effects. Some people here react with horror to the idea of believing anything they can’t statistically validate… some even if the belief has a high probability of making itself come true in the future.
Neither. I’m saying that a popular attitude of LW culture is to prefer not to “believe” the thing it’s useful to believe, if there is any evidence the belief is not actually true, or often even if there is simply no peer-reviewed evidence explicitly associated with said belief.
My immediate reaction to this paragraph is skepticism that I can believe something, if I don’t believe the evidence weighs in its favor; other people might be able to choose what they believe, but I’ve internalized proper epistemology well enough that it’s beyond me. On reflection, though, while I think there is some truth to this, it’s also a cached oversimplification that derives its strength from being part of my identity as a rationalist.
Well, while a self-fulfilling belief might help you accomplish one goal better, it may make you worse off accomplishing another (assuming that belief is not true). It may be the case that some false self-fulfilling beliefs will make you better off throughout your life, but that’s hard to prove.
Why should a belief be true just because it’s useful? Or are you saying people are claiming a belief’s usefulness is not true despite the evidence that it’s useful?
Neither. I’m saying that a popular attitude of LW culture is to prefer not to “believe” the thing it’s useful to believe, if there is any evidence the belief is not actually true, or often even if there is simply no peer-reviewed evidence explicitly associated with said belief.
For example, self-fulfilling prophecies and placebo effects. Some people here react with horror to the idea of believing anything they can’t statistically validate… some even if the belief has a high probability of making itself come true in the future.
My immediate reaction to this paragraph is skepticism that I can believe something, if I don’t believe the evidence weighs in its favor; other people might be able to choose what they believe, but I’ve internalized proper epistemology well enough that it’s beyond me. On reflection, though, while I think there is some truth to this, it’s also a cached oversimplification that derives its strength from being part of my identity as a rationalist.
Related to: Belief in Self-Deception, Litany of Tarski.
Well, while a self-fulfilling belief might help you accomplish one goal better, it may make you worse off accomplishing another (assuming that belief is not true). It may be the case that some false self-fulfilling beliefs will make you better off throughout your life, but that’s hard to prove.
Thank you for eloquently demonstrating precisely what I’m talking about.