Here’s my map of my map with respect to the concept of truth.
Level Zero: I don’t know. I wouldn’t even be investigating these concepts about truth unless on some level I had some form of doubt about them. The only reason I think I know anything is because I assume it’s possible for me to know anything. Maybe all of my priors are horribly messed up with respect to whatever else they potentially should be. Maybe my entire brain is horribly broken and all of my intuitive notions about reality and probability and logic and consistency are meaningless. There’s no way for me to tell.
Level Two: I want to know something, or at least to believe. Abstract truths outside the content of my experience are meaningless. I don’t care about whether or not induction is necessarily a valid form of logic; I only care whether or not it will work in the context of my future experiences. I don’t care whether or not my priors are valid, they’re my priors all the same. On this level I refuse to reject the validity of any viewpoint if that viewpoint is authentic, although I still only abide myself by my own internalized views. My fundamental values are just a fact, and they reject the idea that there is no truth despite whatever my brain might say. Ironically, irrational processes are at the root of my beliefs about rationality and reality.
Level Three: My level three seems to be Eliezer’s level zero. The world consistently works by certain fundamental laws which can be used to make predictions. The laws of this universe can be investigated through the use of my intuitions about logic and the way reality should work. I spend most of my time on this level, but I think that the existence of the other levels is significant because those levels shape the way I understand epistemology and my ability to understand other perspectives.
Level Four: There are certain things which it is good to proclaim to be true, or to fool oneself into believing are true. Some of these things actually are true, and some are actually false. But in the case of self deception, the recognition that some of these things are actually false must be avoided. The self deception aspect of this level of truth does not come into play very often for me, except in some specific hypothetical circumstances.
Here’s my map of my map with respect to the concept of truth.
Level Zero: I don’t know. I wouldn’t even be investigating these concepts about truth unless on some level I had some form of doubt about them. The only reason I think I know anything is because I assume it’s possible for me to know anything. Maybe all of my priors are horribly messed up with respect to whatever else they potentially should be. Maybe my entire brain is horribly broken and all of my intuitive notions about reality and probability and logic and consistency are meaningless. There’s no way for me to tell.
Level One: I know nothing. The problem of induction is insurmountable.
Level Two: I want to know something, or at least to believe. Abstract truths outside the content of my experience are meaningless. I don’t care about whether or not induction is necessarily a valid form of logic; I only care whether or not it will work in the context of my future experiences. I don’t care whether or not my priors are valid, they’re my priors all the same. On this level I refuse to reject the validity of any viewpoint if that viewpoint is authentic, although I still only abide myself by my own internalized views. My fundamental values are just a fact, and they reject the idea that there is no truth despite whatever my brain might say. Ironically, irrational processes are at the root of my beliefs about rationality and reality.
Level Three: My level three seems to be Eliezer’s level zero. The world consistently works by certain fundamental laws which can be used to make predictions. The laws of this universe can be investigated through the use of my intuitions about logic and the way reality should work. I spend most of my time on this level, but I think that the existence of the other levels is significant because those levels shape the way I understand epistemology and my ability to understand other perspectives.
Level Four: There are certain things which it is good to proclaim to be true, or to fool oneself into believing are true. Some of these things actually are true, and some are actually false. But in the case of self deception, the recognition that some of these things are actually false must be avoided. The self deception aspect of this level of truth does not come into play very often for me, except in some specific hypothetical circumstances.