I was surprised to read the delta propagating to so many different parts of your worldviews (organizations, goods, markets, etc), and that makes me think that it’d be relatively easier to ask questions today that have quite different answers under your worldviews. The air conditioner one seems like one, but it seems like we could have many more, and some that are even easier than that. Plausibly you know of some because you’re quite confident in your position; if so, I’d be interested to hear about them[1].
At a meta level, I find it pretty funny that so many smart people seem to disagree on the question of whether questions usually have easily verifiable answers.
I realize that part of your position is that this is just really hard to actually verify, but as in the example of objects in your room it feels like there should be examples where this is feasible with moderate amounts of effort. Of course, a lack of consensus on whether something is actually bad if you dive in further could also be evidence for hardness of verification, even if it’d be less clean.
Yeah, I think this is very testable, it’s just very costly to test—partly because it requires doing deep dives on a lot of different stuff, and partly because it’s the sort of model which makes weak claims about lots of things rather than very precise claims about a few things.
At a meta level, I find it pretty funny that so many smart people seem to disagree on the question of whether questions usually have easily verifiable answers.
And at a twice-meta level, that’s strong evidence for questions not generically having verifiable answers (though not for them generically not having those answers).
I was surprised to read the delta propagating to so many different parts of your worldviews (organizations, goods, markets, etc), and that makes me think that it’d be relatively easier to ask questions today that have quite different answers under your worldviews. The air conditioner one seems like one, but it seems like we could have many more, and some that are even easier than that. Plausibly you know of some because you’re quite confident in your position; if so, I’d be interested to hear about them[1].
At a meta level, I find it pretty funny that so many smart people seem to disagree on the question of whether questions usually have easily verifiable answers.
I realize that part of your position is that this is just really hard to actually verify, but as in the example of objects in your room it feels like there should be examples where this is feasible with moderate amounts of effort. Of course, a lack of consensus on whether something is actually bad if you dive in further could also be evidence for hardness of verification, even if it’d be less clean.
Yeah, I think this is very testable, it’s just very costly to test—partly because it requires doing deep dives on a lot of different stuff, and partly because it’s the sort of model which makes weak claims about lots of things rather than very precise claims about a few things.
And at a twice-meta level, that’s strong evidence for questions not generically having verifiable answers (though not for them generically not having those answers).
(That’s what I meant, though I can see how I didn’t make that very clear.)
So on the Ω-meta-level you need to correct weakly in the other direction again.