Author Topic: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions  (Read 23686 times)

Elder Iptuous

  • Professional Discordian and Physiognomist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5667
  • terribly tedious
    • View Profile
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #150 on: April 06, 2010, 12:09:26 am »
2m+ : no workable solution; grab rifle, seek shelter.
 :D

Triple Zero

  • DO NOT ABUSE EXCEPT FOR URGENT FURNITURE MOVING EMERGENCIES
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 25360
  • Horrible and Sexy Queen of Cheese
    • View Profile
    • Random BIP
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #151 on: April 07, 2010, 01:11:31 pm »
And that, IMVPO, utilitarianism seems fairest, on the whole.

Except that utilitarianism is also another idealistic system which plays fast and loose with how people actually think or behave.  In fact, much of late 19th/early 20th century naive idealism in politics (the League of Nations, attempts to outlaw war, general belief in the infalliability of public opinion, that Reason can lead to ethical conduct etc) derived directly from Benthamite utilitarianism.

So while it may be fair, in the short term, it is untenable in the long term.  

Yes. I came to this conclusion (that it seems fairest), because its counter-examples (as I said, every school of ethics was bombarded with counter-examples) seemed most contrived. Like the "kill one human, save five" examples I mentioned in another thread a while ago.

The real problem with utilitarianism, as you seem to say (but correct me if I misunderstand you), is that it's simply incredibly hard to keep up. Because some cases (and not even contrived ones) require an enormous amount of self-sacrifice. Like donating large amounts of your income to third world countries, once you found a proper organization that would maximize their happiness most efficiently.

So the real final conclusion I came to, if I had to pick one of these schools, I'd have to pick utilitarianism because it seems most fairest to me, however, I would have to be an immoral utilitarian cause I would not be able to keep it up ... :)
Ex-Soviet Bloc Sexual Attack Swede of Tomorrow™
e-prime disclaimer: let it seem fairly unclear I understand the apparent subjectivity of the above statements. maybe.

INFORMATION SO POWERFUL, YOU ACTUALLY NEED LESS.

Triple Zero

  • DO NOT ABUSE EXCEPT FOR URGENT FURNITURE MOVING EMERGENCIES
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 25360
  • Horrible and Sexy Queen of Cheese
    • View Profile
    • Random BIP
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #152 on: April 07, 2010, 01:28:04 pm »
The end result, or at least, what I took home from it (apart from becoming more knowledgeable about the general field, of course), is that there apparently is no perfect solution that works in all cases. And that, IMVPO, utilitarianism seems fairest, on the whole.

What works for one situation may not work for another.  There is no cookie cutter solution for everything, and to insist that all systems - or any system - would be completely scaleable (as one person has apparently asserted) if only humans were perfectly educated kind of reinforces my point.

IF A SYSTEM REQUIRES PERFECTION OR EVEN GENERAL COMPETENCE ON A LARGE SCALE, IT WILL FAIL.

This, and Cram's mention of the word "Heuristics" reminds me of the No Free Lunch Theorem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_in_search_and_optimization

Basically it describes a situation where it can be mathematically proven that there can be no generic search/optimization procedure (algorithm) that is efficient for every single possible problem. (BTW, also holds for meta-heuristics, which are generic optimization improvement methods, such as "best out of three" voting)

Quote
"The 'no free lunch' theorem of Wolpert and Macready," as stated in plain language by Wolpert and Macready themselves, is that "any two algorithms are equivalent when their performance is averaged across all possible problems."[9] The "no free lunch" results indicate that matching algorithms to problems gives higher average performance than does applying a fixed algorithm to all.

Which is basically what you say, right?

The only useful solution to this problem is to use a different algorithm for different problems. Makes sense, but the only way to choose the right algorithm is to make use of "domain knowledge", which is external information based on the particular instance of the problem, but not part of the general class of problems.

In other words, it says (back to real world) you need to apply common sense and critical thinking skills. Which also do not scale well. So I am curious to read your next installments on these subjects :)
Ex-Soviet Bloc Sexual Attack Swede of Tomorrow™
e-prime disclaimer: let it seem fairly unclear I understand the apparent subjectivity of the above statements. maybe.

INFORMATION SO POWERFUL, YOU ACTUALLY NEED LESS.

President Television

  • Told You I
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2096
  • Chupacabra of Internet Sex Crimes
    • View Profile
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #153 on: April 10, 2010, 12:40:15 am »
This thread has got me pumped. It looks like Dok's in top form lately.
I have nothing more to add, except that I await the next installment with great impatience.
My shit list: Stephen Harper, anarchists that complain about taxes instead of institutionalized torture, those people walking, anyone who lets a single aspect of themselves define their entire personality, salesmen that don't smoke pipes, Fredericton New Brunswick, bigots, philosophy majors, my nemesis, pirates that don't do anything, criminals without class, sociopaths, narcissists, furries, juggalos, foes.

Freeky

  • Can't breathe anymore.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 14991
  • wat
    • View Profile
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #154 on: April 10, 2010, 12:43:38 am »
This thread has got me pumped. It looks like Dok's in top form lately.
I have nothing more to add, except that I await the next installment with great impatience.

Dok's got jury duty for a couple weeks. We have to wait because of someone else's Constitution granted right to a fair triiiiiaaaal.

How rude of some people.









:lol: )
If someone does the “Fine, you’re right, I’m clearly a terrible person, I’m Satan, I’m the worst person alive, I should just die” thing in response to criticism of their harmful behavior, they are trying to manipulate people and flip the situation around so that they look like a victim.

As a neuroscientist I have to disagree with the perception that anyone is doing mathematical modeling of cognitive intelligence, yet; intelligence as an economist defines it, yes, but economists are worlds away from actual cognition.


Although it is outside the purview of this organization to offer personal advice, we can say -- without assuming any liability -- that previous experience indicates (and recent market studies corroborate) that given the present condition of the marketplace, continuing with your present course of action is likely to result in substantial in

President Television

  • Told You I
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2096
  • Chupacabra of Internet Sex Crimes
    • View Profile
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #155 on: April 10, 2010, 01:18:46 am »
This thread has got me pumped. It looks like Dok's in top form lately.
I have nothing more to add, except that I await the next installment with great impatience.

Dok's got jury duty for a couple weeks. We have to wait because of someone else's Constitution granted right to a fair triiiiiaaaal.

How rude of some people.









:lol: )

Right. I forgot about that.

Have fun, Dok. (he can't even read this right now, can he?)
My shit list: Stephen Harper, anarchists that complain about taxes instead of institutionalized torture, those people walking, anyone who lets a single aspect of themselves define their entire personality, salesmen that don't smoke pipes, Fredericton New Brunswick, bigots, philosophy majors, my nemesis, pirates that don't do anything, criminals without class, sociopaths, narcissists, furries, juggalos, foes.

Captain Utopia

  • Social Justice Warrior
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2818
  • Futurologue de Prétention
    • View Profile
Re: Unvarnished Truth #3: Filters and preconceptions
« Reply #156 on: June 21, 2010, 04:16:16 pm »
 :mittens:  To both the OP and responses in this thread.


The question is, do you plan to be part of that 99%, or can you train yourself to be part of the 1% that is willing to take the bull by the tail and stare the unpleasant facts in the face?  Do you have the GUTS to toss your pet theories when the universe demonstrates that they are wrong?  Can you bring yourself to think of something NEW, or at least LOOK at something new?  My idea may also be wrong, and I'm willing to see if it can be logically disproven, but before you can apply logic to that idea or anything else, you're going to have to take the blinders off.

  • I think the motivation to take the filters and blinders off needs to exceed the motivation to keep them on.
  • A major filter of mine is to view almost everything through the filter of individual motivations.
  • Thus, I think I'm stuck until I come up with a better theory :-(