[extropy-chat] Re: Overconfidence and meta-rationality

[Keith Henson]

At 10:58 AM 21/03/05 -0500, you wrote:
>At 02:48 AM 3/21/2005, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
>>There's an art of sticking as close to the question as possible - arguing 
>>about
>>If I am rational, then I should have decent reasons - Bayesian causes - 
>>for believing as I do.  Once I have disgorged my reasons for believing 
>>something, my rationality becomes much less inferentially relevant to 
>>whether my belief is probably correct.  ...
>
>Yes.  But as the limited humans we are, we can usually only explicitly 
>communicate a small fraction of the considerations we actually used in 
>choosing our beliefs.

True.  And some of the reasons we maintain beliefs will be used in an 
attempt to embarrass you if you are so foolish as to admit you are an 
evolved social primate with a wired in interest in maintaining your status 
in the local "tribe."

Keith Henson