But does Yudkowsky mention the word “abstraction”? Because if not, then it is not clear why the levels. And if you mention it, then as in the case of scale, I don’t really understand why people would even think that different levels of abstraction exist in the territory.
Edited: I’ve searched in Reductionism 101 and Physicalism 201 and didn’t find mention of “abstraction”, so I save my opinion that using just word “level” doesn’t create right picture in the head.
The main issue is that people often make mistakes that come out of treating maps like they have one level.
Yudkowsky, doesn’t go much into the details of levels but I don’t think “scale” gives a better intuition. It doesn’t help with noticing abstraction. Level might not help you fully but scale doesn’t either.
But does Yudkowsky mention the word “abstraction”? Because if not, then it is not clear why the levels. And if you mention it, then as in the case of scale, I don’t really understand why people would even think that different levels of abstraction exist in the territory.
Edited: I’ve searched in Reductionism 101 and Physicalism 201 and didn’t find mention of “abstraction”, so I save my opinion that using just word “level” doesn’t create right picture in the head.
for one major way scale is in the territory, search for “more is different”.
The main issue is that people often make mistakes that come out of treating maps like they have one level.
Yudkowsky, doesn’t go much into the details of levels but I don’t think “scale” gives a better intuition. It doesn’t help with noticing abstraction. Level might not help you fully but scale doesn’t either.