Absurdity Heuristic

Yoav Ravid (-201) Removed blog posts section (they were all already tagged)
Swimmer963 (+201) tagged posts
habryka (+54/-201)
baaaaaal (+11/-7) grammar fix: singular "there is" to plural "there are" preceeding "a number of"
(+7) added an "a" and a "the"
(+4)
Grognor (+10/-20)
Vladimir_Nesov (+164/-134) moved "see also" to the end, added a link to status quo bias/reversal test
Vladimir_Nesov (+24) /* See also */
Vladimir_Nesov (+30) /* Other posts */

There isare a number of situations wherein which the absurdity heuristic is wrong. A deep theory has to override the intuitive expectation. Where you don't expect intuition to construct an adequate model of reality, classifying an idea as impossible may be overconfident. The future is usually "absurd", although sometimes it's possible to rigorously infer low bounds on capabilities of the future, proving possible what is intuitively absurd.

The absurdity heuristic classifies highly untypical situations as "absurd", or impossible. While normally very useful as a form of epistemic hygiene, allowing us to detect nonsense, it suffers from the same problems as the representativeness heuristic.

There is a number of situations where the absurdity heuristic is wrong. A deep theory has to override the intuitive expectation. Where you don't expect intuition to construct an adequate model of reality, classifying an idea as impossible may be overconfident. The future is usually "absurd", although sometimes it's possible to rigorously infer low bounds on capabilities of the future, proving possible what is intuitively absurd.

Load More (10/21)