Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Real cognitive agents cannot fully represent the entire game they are in or reason to the end of the game.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Idealized rational agents in classical decision theory are defined precisely by their capacity for complete preference orderings over all possible outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates empirical limitations of actual humans with conceptual constraints on rational agency as a theoretical construct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bounded rationality describes a departure from the normative ideal, presupposing that the ideal of full representation is coherent and theoretically tractable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz and subsequent rationalists held that finite minds can grasp infinite structures through recursive rules, not exhaustive enumeration.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A chess-playing agent need not enumerate all game states if it possesses a finite generative procedure that implicitly determines all positions, as Chomsky's competence-performance distinction suggests.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Real cognitive agents are bounded in their information processing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Both memory and reasoning capacities of real agents are limited.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.