The three examples illustrate less arguments actually stated out loud and more false unconscious ways of thinking. “Failure of imagination” certainly is part of the problem, but as a term it doesn’t really illustrate in my opinion the confusion between human-level intuitive and mathematical notions of “simplicity”, and how that causes a invalid pattern-match that leads to false conclusions...
I don’t see the alien-and-pretty-woman picture as quite representative of either failure of imagination or argument from ignorance. I do think that ArisKatsaris’ notion of “simplexity” is more general than these.
Arguments from incredulity take the form: P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false. I cannot imagine how P could possibly be false; therefore P must be true. These arguments are similar to arguments from ignorance in that they too ignore and do not properly eliminate the possibility that something can be both incredible and still be true, or appear to be obvious and yet still be false.
Specifically, “I cannot imagine how anyone could find this girl unattractive, therefore even an alien must find her attractive”.
The orbitals example falls under “appear to be obvious and yet still be false”. So does the FAI one (“good upbringing generally results in good citizenship, so if we educate an AGI properly, it will be friendly”).
Presumably, any guy out there who is actually going through a reasoning process like what you describes also assumes that all women are lesbians, no? I mean, if they really can’t imagine how anyone could find this girl unattractive, it follows not only that aliens are attracted to her, but that human women are as well.
But it isn’t clear to me that everyone who makes this error also assumes that all women are lesbians.
Therefore it seems there’s something going on besides this sort of argument from incredulity.
All three examples seem to fall under the “failure of imagination” category, also known as the Argument from ignorance. Why invent yet another name?
The three examples illustrate less arguments actually stated out loud and more false unconscious ways of thinking. “Failure of imagination” certainly is part of the problem, but as a term it doesn’t really illustrate in my opinion the confusion between human-level intuitive and mathematical notions of “simplicity”, and how that causes a invalid pattern-match that leads to false conclusions...
I don’t see the alien-and-pretty-woman picture as quite representative of either failure of imagination or argument from ignorance. I do think that ArisKatsaris’ notion of “simplexity” is more general than these.
From Wikipedia:
Specifically, “I cannot imagine how anyone could find this girl unattractive, therefore even an alien must find her attractive”.
The orbitals example falls under “appear to be obvious and yet still be false”. So does the FAI one (“good upbringing generally results in good citizenship, so if we educate an AGI properly, it will be friendly”).
Wait, what?
Presumably, any guy out there who is actually going through a reasoning process like what you describes also assumes that all women are lesbians, no? I mean, if they really can’t imagine how anyone could find this girl unattractive, it follows not only that aliens are attracted to her, but that human women are as well.
But it isn’t clear to me that everyone who makes this error also assumes that all women are lesbians.
Therefore it seems there’s something going on besides this sort of argument from incredulity.