I see now. No, my P(any book on X will convince me of X) is high, for all X. P(religion X is true) is low for all X, except X I actually believe in.
in general minimize the number of logical errors / tricks used.
For a true proposition, it should be possible to bring it to 0. For all else, use as few as possible (even if it means thousands). It’s probably a good policy anyway, as I originally claimed.
There are a few hundred people in deep caves on the Anatolian plateau that thank you for minimizing the force of the Indonesian caldera, sparing them and allowing them to attempt to continue the human race.
The magnitude of the wrongness isn’t really an issue. The point was that with the rule that “real arguments have to be used when available”, he can think that the book he just read convinced him with real arguments.
I see now. No, my P(any book on X will convince me of X) is high, for all X. P(religion X is true) is low for all X, except X I actually believe in.
For a true proposition, it should be possible to bring it to 0. For all else, use as few as possible (even if it means thousands). It’s probably a good policy anyway, as I originally claimed.
There are a few hundred people in deep caves on the Anatolian plateau that thank you for minimizing the force of the Indonesian caldera, sparing them and allowing them to attempt to continue the human race.
The magnitude of the wrongness isn’t really an issue. The point was that with the rule that “real arguments have to be used when available”, he can think that the book he just read convinced him with real arguments.
I was wrong about the importance of this factor.