Reading the top quotes, I found What is Wrong With Our Thoughts by David Stove again, quoted by EY. At some point I read that, but forgot the metadata and was unable to find it again when I went looking for it later.
In that chapter, written in 1991, David Stove calls for a nosology of thought—that is, a classification of the many ways human thought can go wrong. It seems to me that Less Wrong’s sequences contain just such a classification, and that explaining what’s wrong with the many examples about three should not be so difficult anymore.
do you need the sequences or is it enough to say that the beliefs espoused in the three examples do not pay rent? it seems to me that what is missing from the vast epistemological debate throughout human history is the idea that truth only means anything in relation to goals.
That’s an interesting idea—it might make a good page on the Less Wrong Wiki, consisting just of his “three” examples and everyone can add links to LW articles explaining the wrongness.
Personally though, I’m still stumped by most of them. :)
Such a page could also be useful for pointing out areas which haven’t been discussed here yet. For instance, there is surely much to say about “The proposition that 3 is the fifth root of 243 is a tautology, just like ‘An oculist is an eye-doctor.’”, but I can’t think of any LW posts talking about it.
Reading the top quotes, I found What is Wrong With Our Thoughts by David Stove again, quoted by EY. At some point I read that, but forgot the metadata and was unable to find it again when I went looking for it later.
In that chapter, written in 1991, David Stove calls for a nosology of thought—that is, a classification of the many ways human thought can go wrong. It seems to me that Less Wrong’s sequences contain just such a classification, and that explaining what’s wrong with the many examples about three should not be so difficult anymore.
do you need the sequences or is it enough to say that the beliefs espoused in the three examples do not pay rent? it seems to me that what is missing from the vast epistemological debate throughout human history is the idea that truth only means anything in relation to goals.
Stove died in 1994. But his article would be a useful start on such a nosology.
That’s an interesting idea—it might make a good page on the Less Wrong Wiki, consisting just of his “three” examples and everyone can add links to LW articles explaining the wrongness.
Personally though, I’m still stumped by most of them. :)
Such a page could also be useful for pointing out areas which haven’t been discussed here yet. For instance, there is surely much to say about “The proposition that 3 is the fifth root of 243 is a tautology, just like ‘An oculist is an eye-doctor.’”, but I can’t think of any LW posts talking about it.