Live data from Hacker News

Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

gwern.net

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#11

This came up the other day, can someone help explain this to me? I am not quite sharp enough to understand it. Context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48911884

Based on your comments I think you do understand it but are taking it too seriously / too literally.

Consider the title: Scott Alexander and others have written more clear, philosophically robust versions of a similar argument ("you shouldn't trade your agency for good outcomes").

But that's not the point here. This is the artsy version that's supposed to make you feel the argument.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#12
I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?"

Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, subvert or replace the wearer's free will.

Not seeing the problem here.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a fairly direct parable against AI, suggesting that even if it's right it's better to think for yourself.

You mean like LLM AI? Seems a little too early for that no? Either way, what is it right about? In your mind?

It's not subtle, it's clearly saying "if you outsource your thinking to something else, your mind will wither".

People complaining about this have a long and storied history, this is the same as Plato complaining philosophers were ruining their minds by writing things down to remember them.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#14

This came up the other day, can someone help explain this to me? I am not quite sharp enough to understand it. Context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48911884

Based on your comments I think you do understand it but are taking it too seriously / too literally. Consider the title: Scott Alexander and others have written more clear, philosophically robust versions of a similar argument ("you shouldn't trade your agency for good outcomes"). But that's not the point here. This is the artsy version that's supposed to make you feel the argument.

[dead]

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like LLM AI? Seems a little too early for that no? Either way, what is it right about? In your mind?

It's not subtle, it's clearly saying "if you outsource your thinking to something else, your mind will wither". People complaining about this have a long and storied history, this is the same as Plato complaining philosophers were ruining their minds by writing things down to remember them.

This is not what Plato thought, this is not even what Plato wrote that Socrates thought. You are referring to the Phaedrus. You should read it! Its much better than this story, trust me.

But either way, people's minds do not wither in this story, it explicitly works out fine for them?

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#16

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

How would you feel with a procedure in which your brain was scooped out like ice cream from a bowl, and replaced with circuits that would do a better job of your life for you?

> So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, subvert or replace the wearer's free will.

Ok, the ice cream scooping happens slowly. At what point of atrophy, do you think it becomes easier to revert to what is left of it?

You still have free will, in the strictest sense. But you are increasingly dependent, so have lost optionality that no amount of will can replace.

Is your life story about what flows to you? Or about what challenges come to you, that you, yourself meet and overcome?

EDIT: But you are also right - given discipline - the right thing to do is always leverage every piece of good advice we can get. From bot or earring. By always (1) first coming up with our own best plan, so we have a basis to recognize and appreciate the insights in better ideas (2) get the best possible feedback on that plan, the good and the bad, and then (3) with what we learned from that, attempt a better plan, and repeat until getting somewhere better that either initial plan, for all the looping. Then still learn from any failure or success. And do not go down the slippery slope of delegating unimportant questions, like choices of ice cream flavors! This is how I get the most from my AI advisors. To work and train myself faster and harder!

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#17

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

It stands to reason that the people who took the earring off were less happy and made worse decisions than the people who kept it on for the rest of their lives.

So then ask yourself: why did they take it off? Pondering the implications of that question is the entire point of this short story.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not subtle, it's clearly saying "if you outsource your thinking to something else, your mind will wither". People complaining about this have a long and storied history, this is the same as Plato complaining philosophers were ruining their minds by writing things down to remember them.

This is not what Plato thought, this is not even what Plato wrote that Socrates thought. You are referring to the Phaedrus . You should read it! Its much better than this story, trust me. But either way, people's minds do not wither in this story, it explicitly works out fine for them?

> But either way, people's minds do not wither in this story, it explicitly works out fine for them?

Huh?

"when the corpses of the wearers were being prepared for burial, it was noted that their brains were curiously deformed: the neocortexes had wasted away, and the bulk of their mass was an abnormally hypertrophied mid- and lower-brain, especially the parts associated with reflexive action"

You could infer their minds fading away even without that paragraph, but it's very explicit.

Also you have another comment where you insist nobody has explained what the story is arguing when multiple people told you what the story is arguing, what the heck.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not what Plato thought, this is not even what Plato wrote that Socrates thought. You are referring to the Phaedrus . You should read it! Its much better than this story, trust me. But either way, people's minds do not wither in this story, it explicitly works out fine for them?

> But either way, people's minds do not wither in this story, it explicitly works out fine for them? Huh? "when the corpses of the wearers were being prepared for burial, it was noted that their brains were curiously deformed: the neocortexes had wasted away, and the bulk of their mass was an abnormally hypertrophied mid- and lower-brain, especially the parts associated with reflexive action" You could infer their mi…

OK, so there is a magical device that provides you with deep contentment no matter what. But then, when you die and they cut your head open, the physical, biological brain has shrunk. And that's bad. Is that right? Is this what it's about?

Is the story actually arguing something? I have just been literally asking what it even presumes itself to be about. Is it the gloss above?

If it's about agency, I don't get it. It seems silly/facile to assert the "right" decision is the thing that matters without making the thing so magic it doesn't even make sense. Does agency stop you from getting hit by a runaway bus? Help you from being persecuted for arbitrary reasons? The story tells us they all, unfailingly, live "abnormally successful" lives. That's all supposed to be because of their (non) agency because of the earring device?

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#20

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

How would you feel with a procedure in which your brain was scooped out like ice cream from a bowl, and replaced with circuits that would do a better job of your life for you? > So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, subvert or replace the wearer's free will. Ok, the ice cream scooping happens slowly. At what point of atrophy, do you think it becomes easier to revert to what is left of it? You still have free will…

How would you feel with a procedure in which your brain was scooped out like ice cream from a bowl, and replaced with circuits that would do a better job of your life for you?

One way to answer that might be to argue the counterfactual. How would I feel if I were born in the state described in the story -- little or no gray matter, but endowed with the promise of a successful, enjoyable life, valued and respected by those around me -- and someone offered me an earring whose advice would give rise to uncertainty, self-doubt, and a constant, nagging awareness of my own ignorance and lost potential?

What incentive would I have to continue wearing that earring?

For that version of the story to make sense, you'd almost have to make it a cursed object that couldn't be removed once equipped.

Post reply on HN