Robin Hanson wrote:
>
> I think you've missed the point. My argument is not about responding to
> arguments at all - it is about responding to opinions, and hence about
> responding to all those unconscious processes you celebrate. You have
> unconscious processes and so do they. To prefer the output of your
> processes to theirs you have to assume that you are more meta-rational.
Eeensy-weensy correction: To prefer the output of your processes to
theirs, you have to assume that you are better-informed or a better
thinker. This does not mean disagreement, however; you may both believe
that Pat is the better-informed of the two, and adjust the "compromise"
opinion to be primarily weighted towards Pat's. If you each believe that
you are the more rational (that is, the better-informed), then to not
think the situation is symmetrical, you must believe that you are more
meta-rational. If you both believe that you are both more meta-rational,
one of you must be wrong.
-- -- -- -- --
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:03 MDT