Note: this meetup is an hour later than usual, due to the SSC meetup also being hosted in the Garden a few hours earlier.
Claim: moral/status/value judgements (like "we should blame X for Y", “Z is Bad”, etc) like to sneak into epistemic models and masquerade as weight-bearing components of predictions.
How can we detect moral/status/value judgements masquerading as components of predictive models? In this meetup, we'll try exercises in tabooing moral/status/value judgements, and hopefully discover some holes in our models.
Hi, we discussed practicing tabuing 'should' in writing. As this post is not very visible anymore I suggest a post about the practice with a link to either a Google Doc or Slack for collaborative writing.
Reminds me of E-Prime where forms of to-be are tabooed. It is also about accurate epistemics - but about actual evidence that you have about facts vs. values.
Note: this meetup is an hour later than usual, due to the SSC meetup also being hosted in the Garden a few hours earlier.
Claim: moral/status/value judgements (like "we should blame X for Y", “Z is Bad”, etc) like to sneak into epistemic models and masquerade as weight-bearing components of predictions.
How can we detect moral/status/value judgements masquerading as components of predictive models? In this meetup, we'll try exercises in tabooing moral/status/value judgements, and hopefully discover some holes in our models.
We'll be meeting in Walled Garden at 1pm.
http://garden.lesswrong.com?code=5JyZ&event=john-wentworth-on-tabooing-should