|Vladimir_Nesov||v1.12.0Dec 4th 2009||(+25)|
|Zack_M_Davis||v1.11.0Nov 16th 2009||(-42) byline removal|
|PeerInfinity||v1.10.0Sep 28th 2009||(+57/-57)|
|steven0461||v1.9.0Sep 3rd 2009||(+15/-15)|
|PeerInfinity||v1.8.0Aug 6th 2009|
|Eliezer Yudkowsky||v1.7.0Jul 16th 2009||(+193/-278) removed reference to surface vs. deep analogies; that is a question of what updates are licensed, not a question of observation vs. nonobservation|
|Vladimir_Nesov||v1.6.0Jul 14th 2009||(+46) /* Blog posts */|
|Vladimir_Nesov||v1.5.0Jun 25th 2009||(+20/-52)|
|PeerInfinity||v1.4.0May 25th 2009||(+33)|
|PeerInfinity||v1.3.0May 25th 2009||(+6)|
To form accurate beliefs about something, you really do have to observe it. This can be viewed as a special case of the second law of
thermodynamics, in fact, since "knowledge" is correlation of belief with reality, which is mutual information, which is a form of negentropy.
To form accurate beliefs about something, you really do have to observe it.
And this is a physical law. Surface similarity between different phenomena may indicate that they are related, but it is not necessarily the case. Reasoning by similarity is only valid where it allows to surface actual interaction.