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
    The use of potentially unsound heuristics should be regar... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The use of potentially unsound heuristics should be regarded as falling within a generalized account of rationality.

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Heuristics of the kind studied by cognitive psychologists such as Tversky and Kahneman may benefit an agent in certain circumstances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A rationality account informed by computational complexity theory permits inference strategies that are not deductively complete.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rationality norms are prescriptive ideals, not descriptive summaries of what agents find computationally convenient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant's distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperatives entails that pragmatic efficiency cannot ground normative rational status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Classifying heuristics as 'rational' because they are useful conflates instrumental success with epistemic justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Tversky and Kahneman's own research demonstrates that availability and representativeness heuristics produce systematic, predictable errors.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A generalized rationality account that licenses inference strategies producing systematic errors is self-undermining, as Goldman argues in 'Epistemics'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Computational tractability constraints explain why agents use heuristics but do not normatively justify treating their outputs as rational beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    A generalized rationality account that licenses inference strategies producing s...A rationality account informed by computational complexity theory permits infere...Classifying heuristics as 'rational' because they are useful conflates instrumen...Computational tractability constraints explain why agents use heuristics but do ...
    +4 moreShow less
    Heuristics of the kind studied by cognitive psychologists such as Tversky and Ka...Kant's distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperatives entails that...Rationality norms are prescriptive ideals, not descriptive summaries of what age...Tversky and Kahneman's own research demonstrates that availability and represent...

    Similar

    The use of heuristics — including potentially unsound ones — should be...98%The use of heuristics—including potentially unsound ones—can fall with...98%The use of heuristics—even potentially unsound ones—should be regarded...97%A generalized account of rationality informed by computational complex...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    \(\neg K_i \phi \rightarrow K_i \neg K_i \phi\), which expresses that \(i\)’s failure to know \(\phi\) entails that he knows of this failure – are considered more controversial. , Hintikka 1962; Lenzen 1978; Fagin et al. 1995) is that the most defensible choices of logics of knowledge lie between the modal systems \(\textsf{S4}\) and \(\textsf{S5}\). [56] Note, however, that both of these results seem prima facie implausible relative to our everyday understanding of knowledge. For on the one han
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit