we have direct access to neither Is nor Ought but can compare strategies’ performance to one another
I don’t understand this part. The only way in which we don’t have direct access to Is or Ought is a fairly philosophical one, and on that level we don’t have direct access to the performance of our strategies either?
Assuming indirect realism, then we don’t have direct access to the performance of our strategies either, so I’m not sure how that ends up being more useful.
I don’t understand this part. The only way in which we don’t have direct access to Is or Ought is a fairly philosophical one, and on that level we don’t have direct access to the performance of our strategies either?
>The only way in which we don’t have direct access to Is or Ought is a fairly philosophical one
Sounds like maybe you’re not an indirect realist and if so it would take a bunch to reconcile on this.
Assuming indirect realism, then we don’t have direct access to the performance of our strategies either, so I’m not sure how that ends up being more useful.
We use comparison, which is itself a strategy. We do the same when we investigate an Is or an Ought.