3 ms·
I don't think calling it something else is going to remove people's personal stake in the behaviour. When I said reasonable person, I meant an objective observe
by simonh 6y ago
I don't think calling it something else is going to remove people's personal stake in the behaviour. When I said reasonable person, I meant an objective observer. People with ulterior motives and something to gain will tend to prevaricate if it's in their interests to do so whatever terminology we use.
- wildermuthn 6y agoNaming is both hard and important. Reading over the comments in this thread, one of the most up-voted of them reads, "Luckily, there is this one reliable method for detecting a lie, checking whether what the suspect says is true." I'm writing from the perspective of "how would one build an accurate lie-detector?" And my point is that you shouldn't. You should build something that measures false-confidence. It is infinitely harder to create a lie-detector than it is to create a false-confidence assessor because people always mix up subjective vs. objective truth. It is kind of like the late 90's difference between a "Web Portal" (yahoo) and a "Search Engine" (google). Ostensibly, they were aiming at the same thing: getting us to the content we were looking for. But the difference in name led to a difference in implementation and product. The analogy is even more striking because Yahoo's categorization of links made a stronger implicit claim to being the kind of content you wanted than Google's ranked list of results.