4 ms·

Given the two of you probably have different models of reality, perhaps you two can try and figure out which is correct by seeing which model gives better predi

Given the two of you probably have different models of reality, perhaps you two can try and figure out which is correct by seeing which model gives better predictions? So try to come up with some sort of future observation that can be made where you think the other person's model would give a different answer to yours about what you would be able to objectively observe. What do you reckon?

vlovich123 2y ago
Over what time scale, how do we agree on facts, and how do we evaluate things that require a common value system to determine whether the facts are good or bad?
- concordDance 2y ago
  The idea would be that the two of them collaboratively agree on some observable prediction they differ on. E.g. level of officially reported government spending in 4 years time or gdp growth rate next year or number of plane crashes next year or what have you. Just some observable metric. If they literally can't come up with a single observable predictive difference then the predictive aspects of their models are actually equivalent and they are only narratively different and don't "really disagree". Like Copenhagen interpretation vs many worlds.
  - vlovich123 2y ago
    Many things don't have quantifiable metrics like that. For example, is USA still a democracy in 4 years? Are people more or less free?. You know, important questions that aren't just economic numbers. Even semi-quantifiable stuff like "are Americans better educated" is debatable on many topics if you can't agree on truth. Oh, and that GDP growth rate number? That relies on a lot of trust as to who's doing the reporting. For example, many people don't believe China's reported GDP numbers. What makes you think the USA doesn't devolve to such a distrust as well.
    - concordDance 2y ago
      If they affect your life they can be observed. If "democracy" is just metaphysics then it's irrelevant. But if it has actual tangible effects such as "can you vote?", "can you protest the government?", "is the leader of the opposition arrested?", "do most people think they live in a democracy?", "how popular is new legislation compared to previous years?", etc... Then you can make predictions about it and test them! You can even do local predictions if both can agree, such as "will the combined incomes of my family be higher or lower in 4 years time?" as low coupling proxies for gdp. (Ideally one would use probabilities for loosely linked proxies like that and use the probability differences the two theories assign to give bits of evidence to one over the other, so you'd want many many such proxies, ideally uncorrelated ones)
      - vlovich123 2y ago
        > can you vote? can you protest the government? do most people think they live in a democracy? Was Jan 6 a protest of the government or an insurrection? Can Russians vote or are elections a sham? Do the majority of Russians believe they live in a democracy if they’re afraid of whose conducting the polling (or the MAGA non response to polling)? Those are values question that require you to have an agreement on reality. > You can even do local predictions if both can agree, such as "will the combined incomes of my family be higher or lower in 4 years time?" as low coupling proxies for gdp Your personal income has absolutely no predictive value on gdp. It’s more predictive of whether you personally made successful bets or even if you’re better at sucking up to the current power structure. It tells you nothing about population level metrics if you have no way of conducting reliable population level surveys. For example Donald Trump’s personal net worth sky rocketed under Biden because he won the election while as the leader of the opposition to the democrats was looking at jail time and whether that was legitimate or not depends on which political lens you look through it. > If they affect your life they can be observed. Ah, but if either side distrusts the other about whether the observation made is truthfully reported, how do you solve that? It requires some amount of trust and right now there’s a very clear divide there.
        concordDance 2y ago

vlovich123 2y ago

Over what time scale, how do we agree on facts, and how do we evaluate things that require a common value system to determine whether the facts are good or bad?

concordDance 2y ago
The idea would be that the two of them collaboratively agree on some observable prediction they differ on. E.g. level of officially reported government spending in 4 years time or gdp growth rate next year or number of plane crashes next year or what have you. Just some observable metric. If they literally can't come up with a single observable predictive difference then the predictive aspects of their models are actually equivalent and they are only narratively different and don't "really disagree". Like Copenhagen interpretation vs many worlds.
- vlovich123 2y ago
  Many things don't have quantifiable metrics like that. For example, is USA still a democracy in 4 years? Are people more or less free?. You know, important questions that aren't just economic numbers. Even semi-quantifiable stuff like "are Americans better educated" is debatable on many topics if you can't agree on truth. Oh, and that GDP growth rate number? That relies on a lot of trust as to who's doing the reporting. For example, many people don't believe China's reported GDP numbers. What makes you think the USA doesn't devolve to such a distrust as well.
  - concordDance 2y ago
    If they affect your life they can be observed. If "democracy" is just metaphysics then it's irrelevant. But if it has actual tangible effects such as "can you vote?", "can you protest the government?", "is the leader of the opposition arrested?", "do most people think they live in a democracy?", "how popular is new legislation compared to previous years?", etc... Then you can make predictions about it and test them! You can even do local predictions if both can agree, such as "will the combined incomes of my family be higher or lower in 4 years time?" as low coupling proxies for gdp. (Ideally one would use probabilities for loosely linked proxies like that and use the probability differences the two theories assign to give bits of evidence to one over the other, so you'd want many many such proxies, ideally uncorrelated ones)
    - vlovich123 2y ago
      > can you vote? can you protest the government? do most people think they live in a democracy? Was Jan 6 a protest of the government or an insurrection? Can Russians vote or are elections a sham? Do the majority of Russians believe they live in a democracy if they’re afraid of whose conducting the polling (or the MAGA non response to polling)? Those are values question that require you to have an agreement on reality. > You can even do local predictions if both can agree, such as "will the combined incomes of my family be higher or lower in 4 years time?" as low coupling proxies for gdp Your personal income has absolutely no predictive value on gdp. It’s more predictive of whether you personally made successful bets or even if you’re better at sucking up to the current power structure. It tells you nothing about population level metrics if you have no way of conducting reliable population level surveys. For example Donald Trump’s personal net worth sky rocketed under Biden because he won the election while as the leader of the opposition to the democrats was looking at jail time and whether that was legitimate or not depends on which political lens you look through it. > If they affect your life they can be observed. Ah, but if either side distrusts the other about whether the observation made is truthfully reported, how do you solve that? It requires some amount of trust and right now there’s a very clear divide there.
      - concordDance 2y ago