Voted up, despite the lack of links to related material, because I think it’s an important and far underappreciated point. Both in your life, and in AI design, you need to think, “How did this choice/event/phenomenon even come to my attention in the first place?”
For an example of this oversight in action, refer to my previous qualified criticism of an AI lab’s automated scientist, where it’s easy to miss how much of the “attention focusing” the team did before their program even saw what was left of the problem.
I would revise this though:
what we call ‘thinking’ doesn’t involve rational thought. It’s feeling. People ponder an issue, then respond in the way that they feel stands out the most from the sea of associations.
What we call thinking doesn’t necessarily involve rational thought, but you can readjust your thinking processes to better align with rationality. Indeed, that’s the whole point of this site.
Voted up, despite the lack of links to related material, because I think it’s an important and far underappreciated point. Both in your life, and in AI design, you need to think, “How did this choice/event/phenomenon even come to my attention in the first place?”
(ETA: Hegemonicon made a largely similar point, with good citations.)
For an example of this oversight in action, refer to my previous qualified criticism of an AI lab’s automated scientist, where it’s easy to miss how much of the “attention focusing” the team did before their program even saw what was left of the problem.
I would revise this though:
What we call thinking doesn’t necessarily involve rational thought, but you can readjust your thinking processes to better align with rationality. Indeed, that’s the whole point of this site.