> So maybe what we need to do is to start a Society, a Bayesian Society,
> for people who understand the theorem about disagreements. The founding
> principle of the Society would be that you could not "agree to disagree".
> You can only either say that someone is lying about his sincere desire
> to reach the truth, or else you must come to agreement.
Disagreement is a symptom of a diseases, i.e., non-truth-seeking. But its
not always a good idea to just directly eliminate symptoms. Pain is a
symptom of bodily harm, but if we just eliminate pain direcly, we risk
not attending to real harms. Similarly, directly eliminating disagreement
might be done via means other than inducing real truth-seeking.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:03 MDT