[HN Gopher] An Introduction to Logical Decision Theory
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       An Introduction to Logical Decision Theory
        
       Author : apsec112
       Score  : 34 points
       Date   : 2022-05-30 20:37 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arbital.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arbital.com)
        
       | spread_love wrote:
       | Is this a transcript? Why is it in Q&A format?
        
         | chabad360 wrote:
         | Judging by the "imaginary" characters, I believe this is the
         | Socratic method.
         | 
         | https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method
        
       | piradoz wrote:
        
       | dash2 wrote:
       | This is quite fun. From a very different starting point, the idea
       | of Team Reasoning is another non-standard way of thinking about
       | rationality, which also starts from the idea of "shared
       | commitments":
       | 
       | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1000200309853874...
       | 
       | The paper underlying this discussion is here, by the way, and
       | Eliezer Yudkowsky is an author:
       | 
       | https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5577
        
       | johnaspden wrote:
       | This is really great, and looks like it might tie into the idea
       | in negotiation theory of 'splitting the pie'.
        
       | michael1999 wrote:
       | Can someone explain where this diverges from Kant?
        
         | dash2 wrote:
         | The article itself explains that.
        
         | gnulinux wrote:
         | > Q: [...] Is this something like Kant's Categorical Imperative
         | [...]?
         | 
         | > A: Again, this is a theory of decisions about logic, not a
         | theory about logical decisions. [...]
        
       | dahaka27 wrote:
       | There's something to this school of thought but the logical
       | counter-factual stuff just seems like such a dead end
       | 
       | I don't understand why the better approach isn't some kind of
       | type-theoretic style answer - just say that a first-order
       | decision algorithm takes in a problem description and returns a
       | choice, and a second-order one takes in a problem and returns a
       | first-order algorithm
       | 
       | Then say your decision algorithm is a second-order one that
       | argmaxes over which first-order one performs best on the input
       | problem. There's no logical counter-possibility issues because
       | you're not having to imagine "what if my algorithm behaved
       | differently", the fact that it necessarily returns a particular
       | first-order algorithm doesn't contradict it being able to
       | evaluate them
        
       | drdeca wrote:
       | How does this differ from Functional Decision Theory? Or did they
       | just change what they call it?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-01 23:02 UTC)