Re:Trapped priors as a basic problem of rationality
by heavyset_go on Saturday March 13, 2021 @03:50PM
(#26449875)
> The “just-so” style that the author uses to explain psychological phenomena appeals to the readers’ cognitive biases and avoids confronting the reader with the more rigorous, mechanistic (perhaps evidence-based?) explanations that the same author proposes as a way to combat said cognitive biases. This strikes me as mildly ironic.
This is endemic to the rationalist community. It's actually quite humorous once you begin to notice it.
Re:Trapped priors as a basic problem of rationality
by AliceWong on Sunday March 14, 2021 @07:22AM
(#26454419)
What do you mean by "just-so" style? I'm not familiar with the term.
Re:Trapped priors as a basic problem of rationality
by catlifeonmars on Sunday March 14, 2021 @09:21PM
(#26461531)
> In science and philosophy, a just-so story is an untestable narrative explanation for a cultural practice, a biological trait, or behavior of humans or other animals. The pejorative[1] nature of the expression is an implicit criticism that reminds the listener of the essentially fictional and unprovable nature of such an explanation. Such tales are common in folklore and mythology (where they are known as etiological myths—see etiology).
Edit:
Less snarky response here. The “just-so” style that the author uses to explain psychological phenomena appeals to the readers’ cognitive biases and avoids confronting the reader with the more rigorous, mechanistic (perhaps evidence-based?) explanations that the same author proposes as a way to combat said cognitive biases. This strikes me as mildly ironic.