if you are in a sad mood, it is a fact that you are in a sad mood … So moods influence facts
Don’t be silly.
The result is not that the moods do not influence their beliefs and actions, but that they do not notice the influence of their moods on their beliefs and actions.
I hear what you are saying, but that’s more prevalent among normies, if anything. I suspect the nerds are more likely to fight the influence of mood on facts (and usually lose), while the normies just wholeheartedly embrace it.
other elements of your utility function in fact influence your beliefs
Yes, of course they do. But “facts” and “beliefs” are very different things.
It’s not silly, but an important fact about reality. The mood you are in influences your behavior and therefore the consequences of your behavior, and thus the future state of the world and all the facts about it. This is directly related to the other point I made about ignoring moods.
I hear what you are saying, but that’s more prevalent among normies, if anything.
It might be equally prevalent.
I suspect the nerds are more likely to fight the influence of mood on facts (and usually lose)
Yes, but quite often with a good deal of ignorance about the mood, and this contributes to the losing.
But “facts” and “beliefs” are very different things.
The observation that you yourself are part of reality is trivial. Of course anything trivial can be spun as important.
It may be trivial, but it is also important, and in practice it is a triviality that people very often ignore, to the detriment of their understanding. Let me give some examples:
What we are talking about. People often make plans which take no account of the fact that they have feelings and desires and beliefs that may entirely prevent those plans from taking place. So they are acting like those things are not part of reality.
The reason people object to the idea that they do not have a soul which is completely separate from their body. It is easy to see that there is nothing specifically horrible about bodily parts which could prevent them from taking care of the functions of a soul. Suppose there was a spiritual part that had those functions: any objection that you could make to the bodily parts doing that function, could be made to the spiritual part doing that function. So the real reason is wanting to think that you are not a part of reality.
In the discussion of the Smoking Lesion, the reason people think it is important to “change the probability” that they are going to get cancer is that they think that they themselves and their decision are not part of reality, but something coming in from outside and changing it. In reality they are just a part of what is there, so there is no need to change anything, but it is fine not to have cancer, by choosing not to smoke.
Yudkowsky used to talk about imposing his goals on a supposedly indifferent universe. This of course is impossible: he himself is a PART of the universe, and any goal that he seeks, the universe is seeking, just in that part which happens to be him. It also follows that the universe is not indifferent, since its parts are not indifferent.
In a similar way, people on LW talked about “resisting entropy” and supposedly resisting the “goals” of the universe. But again since people are part of the universe, they can resist it in no way: whatever they do, the universe does. And since they are physical parts of it, resisting entropy is impossible, since they will follow the second law of thermodynamics just like everything else. It is true that people occasionally lower the entropy of some things, but only by increasing the entropy of the whole system more than ever. In other words, far from resisting the universe’s supposed goal of entropy, they themselves promote it by everything they do, since they are parts of the universe.
Evidence?
Principle of indifference. I see it very often in both and nothing has convinced me it is more prevalent in one place than in the other.
Don’t be silly.
I hear what you are saying, but that’s more prevalent among normies, if anything. I suspect the nerds are more likely to fight the influence of mood on facts (and usually lose), while the normies just wholeheartedly embrace it.
Yes, of course they do. But “facts” and “beliefs” are very different things.
It’s not silly, but an important fact about reality. The mood you are in influences your behavior and therefore the consequences of your behavior, and thus the future state of the world and all the facts about it. This is directly related to the other point I made about ignoring moods.
It might be equally prevalent.
Yes, but quite often with a good deal of ignorance about the mood, and this contributes to the losing.
Sure.
The observation that you yourself are part of reality is trivial. Of course anything trivial can be spun as important.
Evidence?
It may be trivial, but it is also important, and in practice it is a triviality that people very often ignore, to the detriment of their understanding. Let me give some examples:
What we are talking about. People often make plans which take no account of the fact that they have feelings and desires and beliefs that may entirely prevent those plans from taking place. So they are acting like those things are not part of reality.
The reason people object to the idea that they do not have a soul which is completely separate from their body. It is easy to see that there is nothing specifically horrible about bodily parts which could prevent them from taking care of the functions of a soul. Suppose there was a spiritual part that had those functions: any objection that you could make to the bodily parts doing that function, could be made to the spiritual part doing that function. So the real reason is wanting to think that you are not a part of reality.
In the discussion of the Smoking Lesion, the reason people think it is important to “change the probability” that they are going to get cancer is that they think that they themselves and their decision are not part of reality, but something coming in from outside and changing it. In reality they are just a part of what is there, so there is no need to change anything, but it is fine not to have cancer, by choosing not to smoke.
Yudkowsky used to talk about imposing his goals on a supposedly indifferent universe. This of course is impossible: he himself is a PART of the universe, and any goal that he seeks, the universe is seeking, just in that part which happens to be him. It also follows that the universe is not indifferent, since its parts are not indifferent.
In a similar way, people on LW talked about “resisting entropy” and supposedly resisting the “goals” of the universe. But again since people are part of the universe, they can resist it in no way: whatever they do, the universe does. And since they are physical parts of it, resisting entropy is impossible, since they will follow the second law of thermodynamics just like everything else. It is true that people occasionally lower the entropy of some things, but only by increasing the entropy of the whole system more than ever. In other words, far from resisting the universe’s supposed goal of entropy, they themselves promote it by everything they do, since they are parts of the universe.
Principle of indifference. I see it very often in both and nothing has convinced me it is more prevalent in one place than in the other.