Do you have a reason to believe that your opinion is more likely to be correct than other commenters on this site?
Do you believe them to be guilty and linked to an impassioned site full of logical fallacies over a more informative one? (I don’t mean to impune your post, just guessing that this is the solution to your rationalist puzzle)
I think this experiment is going to be of limited success at best due to the fact that people on the road to rationality are far less likely to acquire new beliefs with both strong emotional component and poor grounding in facts. That’s kind of the point of being a rationalist, true beliefs.
The experiment will be a success if there is significant participation.
I certainly don’t expect people here to “acquire new beliefs with both strong emotional component and poor grounding in facts.” It’s because LWers make an effort to avoid this that I’m interested in hearing what they have to say.
Do you believe them to be guilty and linked to an impassioned site full of logical fallacies over a more informative one? (I don’t mean to impune your post, just guessing that this is the solution to your rationalist puzzle)
Which site are you talking about?
This isn’t a “puzzle”. To some extent, it’s a sanity check I’m performing on myself.
This isn’t a “puzzle”. To some extent, it’s a sanity check I’m performing on myself. [from parent]
I believe I know “the answer” with high probability, and want to see what others think [from great grandparent]
Well, I wish your original post had been a little clearer about your reason for posting. I had somehow gotten the idea that my doing the exercise would be a good way for me to improve my own rationality or the rationality of a bunch of other readers, not just helping you assess your own rationality. Asking everyone here to do your exercise is an expensive way to do the latter.
Reading about a current trial and its aftermath is a very inefficient way for the reader to improve his or her own rationality; would you not agree? Do you think that it is an efficient way for the reader to assess his or her own rationality? (I do not unless there is unusually strong evidence, e.g., from DNA, that is held back till everyone has given their probabilities.)
If I did not regard you as a positive contributor to LW, komponisto, I would not bother making these comments on your post.
But, OK, now that you have my attention, I will respond to your human need: yeah, it is shocking how badly judicial systems can malfunction and how bad most people (even judges) are at rationality. Probably the thing that has most helped me tolerate these shocks is caring personal relationships with people whose rationality is above average. There is something about really being heard and understood by another human being about some point that will trip up many people that makes this sort of thing more tolerable.
Anyone participating can make their own judgements before seeing the probabilities given by other commenters. I found that quite interesting and not solely for komponisto’s personal benefit.
On reflection, this statement of mine was misleading. Now that I’ve thought more about why I believe what I believe—the fundamental question of rationality—and am preparing to write up my answer in the form of my next post, I now realize that this post could in fact be considered a sort of puzzle, or test, the answer to which will be given in the next one.
Do you have a reason to believe that your opinion is more likely to be correct than other commenters on this site?
Do you believe them to be guilty and linked to an impassioned site full of logical fallacies over a more informative one? (I don’t mean to impune your post, just guessing that this is the solution to your rationalist puzzle)
I think this experiment is going to be of limited success at best due to the fact that people on the road to rationality are far less likely to acquire new beliefs with both strong emotional component and poor grounding in facts. That’s kind of the point of being a rationalist, true beliefs.
impugn?
The experiment will be a success if there is significant participation.
I certainly don’t expect people here to “acquire new beliefs with both strong emotional component and poor grounding in facts.” It’s because LWers make an effort to avoid this that I’m interested in hearing what they have to say.
Which site are you talking about?
This isn’t a “puzzle”. To some extent, it’s a sanity check I’m performing on myself.
Well, I wish your original post had been a little clearer about your reason for posting. I had somehow gotten the idea that my doing the exercise would be a good way for me to improve my own rationality or the rationality of a bunch of other readers, not just helping you assess your own rationality. Asking everyone here to do your exercise is an expensive way to do the latter.
Reading about a current trial and its aftermath is a very inefficient way for the reader to improve his or her own rationality; would you not agree? Do you think that it is an efficient way for the reader to assess his or her own rationality? (I do not unless there is unusually strong evidence, e.g., from DNA, that is held back till everyone has given their probabilities.)
If I did not regard you as a positive contributor to LW, komponisto, I would not bother making these comments on your post.
But, OK, now that you have my attention, I will respond to your human need: yeah, it is shocking how badly judicial systems can malfunction and how bad most people (even judges) are at rationality. Probably the thing that has most helped me tolerate these shocks is caring personal relationships with people whose rationality is above average. There is something about really being heard and understood by another human being about some point that will trip up many people that makes this sort of thing more tolerable.
Anyone participating can make their own judgements before seeing the probabilities given by other commenters. I found that quite interesting and not solely for komponisto’s personal benefit.
On reflection, this statement of mine was misleading. Now that I’ve thought more about why I believe what I believe—the fundamental question of rationality—and am preparing to write up my answer in the form of my next post, I now realize that this post could in fact be considered a sort of puzzle, or test, the answer to which will be given in the next one.