Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why is it so hard to be rational?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 309 posts

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#31

Post by wizzwizz4 »

> In a recent interview, Cowen—a superhuman reader whose blog, Marginal Revolution, is a daily destination for info-hungry rationalists—told Ezra Klein that the rationality movement has adopted an “extremely culturally specific way of viewing the world.” It’s the culture, more or less, of winning arguments in Web forums.

This matches my observations, too.

> Cowen suggested that to understand reality you must not just read about it but see it firsthand; he has grounded his priors in visits to about a hundred countries, once getting caught in a shoot-out between a Brazilian drug gang and the police.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#32

Post by Siira »

athenot wrote: post #18
SMAAART wrote: post #11

Nobody wants to deal with rational people. Big business want people to buy things they don't need, with money they don't have to impress people they don't like Politicians want people who will drink the cool-aid and follow what they (the politicians) say (and not what they do) Religions... well, same. And so all messages from advertisement, to movies, TV, narrative is about hijacking people's feelings and suppressing…

This sounds cynical but yes, unfortunately, there are many incentives to not be rational.

I think you’re confusing group rationality with individual rationality. There is never an individual incentive not to be individually rational, by definition. Bad Nash equilibria, in game-theoretic terms.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#33

Post by wizzwizz4 »

throwaway9690 wrote: post #30

I think part of the problem is that most people are conditioned into many beliefs from a young age I know a guy who hates foo (using a place holder). In fact he's downright foophobic. He is pretty convinced he has a natural unbiased hate of foo and is being rational when he expresses it. To me as an outsider it is pretty obvious that his hate of foo is the result of cultural conditioning. To him it is perfectly ratio…

Preferences do not need to be rationally justified; without axiomic preferences, we have no preferences at all.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#34

Post by wombatmobile »

lalaithion wrote: post #26
btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

That's why it's called "less wrong". The goal isn't to be perfect, the goal is to do better. To be less wrong.

> the goal is to do better

Why is that "the" goal?

Who sets "the" goal?

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#35

Post by [deleted] »

XorNot wrote: post #7
alecst wrote: post #4

It's really hard (for me, and I imagine, for everyone else) to not put myself into my views and opinions. Like, when someone shows me that I'm wrong, it's natural for me to feel attacked, instead of just taking it as a learning moment. Noticing when this happens and working with it has been my main struggle in learning how to be more rational. Those views and opinions really don't need to be a part of what I consider…

> Allowing multiple beliefs to overlap This doesn't seem very rational. If your beliefs are in conflict and you're content to not resolve that, then pretty much by definition you're accepting a logical inconsistency. If resolving the intersection doesn't lead to a new stable belief system, then aren't you basically going with "whatever I'm feeling that day"?

[deleted]

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#36

Post by voxic11 »

wombatmobile wrote: post #34
lalaithion wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why it's called "less wrong". The goal isn't to be perfect, the goal is to do better. To be less wrong.

> the goal is to do better Why is that "the" goal? Who sets "the" goal?

Its the goal of the LessWrong/Rationalist community.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#37

Post by lotsofpulp »

nvilcins wrote: post #21
XorNot wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Allowing multiple beliefs to overlap This doesn't seem very rational. If your beliefs are in conflict and you're content to not resolve that, then pretty much by definition you're accepting a logical inconsistency. If resolving the intersection doesn't lead to a new stable belief system, then aren't you basically going with "whatever I'm feeling that day"?

We all operate with abstractions and simplifications - because it's impractical (and actually impossible given the complexity of the world) to process end evaluate every single detail. Dealing with contradictions in our own beliefs (paradoxes) is a part of life. The rational approach is to accept that and "fuse" those beliefs carefully, not (a) accept one and reject the others or (b) avoid the topic entirely.

The rational approach is to acknowledge that you do not have sufficient information to proceed, or acknowledge the various assumptions (better word than “belief) that you are using.

If you are using contradicting assumptions, then you should probably check to see if you are doing so because you want the conclusion that you are getting from the assumption.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#38

Post by jcims »

XorNot wrote: post #7
alecst wrote: post #4

It's really hard (for me, and I imagine, for everyone else) to not put myself into my views and opinions. Like, when someone shows me that I'm wrong, it's natural for me to feel attacked, instead of just taking it as a learning moment. Noticing when this happens and working with it has been my main struggle in learning how to be more rational. Those views and opinions really don't need to be a part of what I consider…

> Allowing multiple beliefs to overlap This doesn't seem very rational. If your beliefs are in conflict and you're content to not resolve that, then pretty much by definition you're accepting a logical inconsistency. If resolving the intersection doesn't lead to a new stable belief system, then aren't you basically going with "whatever I'm feeling that day"?

>This doesn't seem very rational. If your beliefs are in conflict and you're content to not resolve that, then pretty much by definition you're accepting a logical inconsistency.

This is just my perspective, but very few beliefs or values map to the whole of reality...they tend to bind to certain aspects of it with a variable priority along the spectrum of that particular dimension, wither its personal agency, the color red, public health, spiders, etc.

However, reality rarely provides us with the ability take a position purely on one factor...nearly every context in which a decision is required operates at the nexus of an uncountable number of these dimensions. Some you can feel swelling to the fore as their slope in your mental 'values' model increases, others stay dormant because you don't see how they apply. This is how most of my decisions that might look outwardly 'inconsistent' arise, there are confounding factors that dominate the topology and steer me in a different direction.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#39

Post by kubb »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #31

> In a recent interview, Cowen—a superhuman reader whose blog, Marginal Revolution, is a daily destination for info-hungry rationalists—told Ezra Klein that the rationality movement has adopted an “extremely culturally specific way of viewing the world.” It’s the culture, more or less, of winning arguments in Web forums. This matches my observations, too. > Cowen suggested that to understand reality you must not just…

One of my many pet peeves are people who travel to more than a 100 countries to get "experiences". It feels misguided, wasteful, excessive and done to impress others, as a sort of a status symbol. I bet he wouldn't be able to name all those countries and cities that he's been to. A deep and meaningful experience requires way more than a superficial visit.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#40

Post by hanche »

lalaithion wrote: post #26
btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

That's why it's called "less wrong". The goal isn't to be perfect, the goal is to do better. To be less wrong.

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that even being less wrong is NP-hard.
Post reply on HN