Comments on: Overcoming bias – what is it good for? http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:20:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Nick Bostrom http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420422 Nick Bostrom Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:26:11 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420422 Erik, I gave "enabling us to go to the moon" not as an example of the usefulness of science but as an example of a sign that science is not all bogus (in contast, e.g., to pyramidology). "Building nuclear weapons" might have been an even better example of such a sign. Erik, I gave “enabling us to go to the moon” not as an example of the usefulness of science but as an example of a sign that science is not all bogus (in contast, e.g., to pyramidology). “Building nuclear weapons” might have been an even better example of such a sign.

]]> By: Erik http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420421 Erik Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:12:53 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420421 Does anybody else find it perplexing that the example of the usefulness of science was "to go to the moon"? Manned missions into space seem to have given very little actual benefit to people in the US, other than maybe an inflated sense of national pride. Now I won't discount the positive benefits of satelite technology and space exploration via mechanical instruments, but if someone were to do a serious cost-benefit analysis of the manned space program in the US since the 50's, I have a strong feeling they'd find billions have been wasted on it. Think what useful technologies could have been developed more rapidly with that money. I bring this point up as there has been big talks and announcements by the US as well as India and China among others who are planning future manned missions to the moon, and shutter at the thought of how much money will be wasted on them. Does anybody else find it perplexing that the example of the usefulness of science was “to go to the moon”? Manned missions into space seem to have given very little actual benefit to people in the US, other than maybe an inflated sense of national pride. Now I won’t discount the positive benefits of satelite technology and space exploration via mechanical instruments, but if someone were to do a serious cost-benefit analysis of the manned space program in the US since the 50′s, I have a strong feeling they’d find billions have been wasted on it. Think what useful technologies could have been developed more rapidly with that money. I bring this point up as there has been big talks and announcements by the US as well as India and China among others who are planning future manned missions to the moon, and shutter at the thought of how much money will be wasted on them.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420420 Stuart Armstrong Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:33:16 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420420 <i>But, Stuart, is Vassar right, or do you have something else in mind when you talk about needing to be certain that business decisions are correct?</i> It's partially that. But it's also within the company as well - those who really believe that what they're doing is the sexiest and most vital project the world has ever seen - they're much more convincing to others, and much more motivated on their own project. And they get that for free, whereases to get those results artificially, a real effort is involved. Add to that the fact that in business the reward for success is huge and the penalty for failure relatively small, and then you get the situation that those who are more overconfident succeed more. And that far outweighs the negatives of overconfidence. But, Stuart, is Vassar right, or do you have something else in mind when you talk about needing to be certain that business decisions are correct?

It’s partially that. But it’s also within the company as well – those who really believe that what they’re doing is the sexiest and most vital project the world has ever seen – they’re much more convincing to others, and much more motivated on their own project.

And they get that for free, whereases to get those results artificially, a real effort is involved. Add to that the fact that in business the reward for success is huge and the penalty for failure relatively small, and then you get the situation that those who are more overconfident succeed more. And that far outweighs the negatives of overconfidence.

]]> By: Patri Friedman http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420419 Patri Friedman Mon, 09 Apr 2007 23:11:05 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420419 <i>But in what sphere of application does success at overcoming bias yield uncontroversial practical benefits?</i> That's easy. Winning at poker. To be less glib, I think of bias as what gets in the way of me accurately estimating the truth and predicting/understanding the world. And knowing truth and understanding the world should generally help me reach my goals, whatever they are. But in what sphere of application does success at overcoming bias yield uncontroversial practical benefits?

That’s easy. Winning at poker.

To be less glib, I think of bias as what gets in the way of me accurately estimating the truth and predicting/understanding the world. And knowing truth and understanding the world should generally help me reach my goals, whatever they are.

]]> By: Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420418 Eliezer Yudkowsky Sun, 08 Apr 2007 17:45:19 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420418 Vassar, your explanation would make sense - honesty-related fallout is a predictable consequence of debiasing when combined with ethics or poor deceptive ability. But, Stuart, is Vassar right, or do you have something else in mind when you talk about needing to be certain that business decisions are correct? Vassar, your explanation would make sense – honesty-related fallout is a predictable consequence of debiasing when combined with ethics or poor deceptive ability. But, Stuart, is Vassar right, or do you have something else in mind when you talk about needing to be certain that business decisions are correct?

]]> By: michael vassar http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420417 michael vassar Sun, 08 Apr 2007 15:18:47 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420417 I think that part of what Stuart is talking about is almost certainly the fact that to get investment for your enterprise it is necessary to claim absolute confidence in its success. Similar claims may be important in communicating up and/or down a hierarchy. At worst, he could lie, but regular lies would probably increase the level of stress associated with the endeavor. Overcoming Bias may reduce stress-alleviating doublethink. I think that part of what Stuart is talking about is almost certainly the fact that to get investment for your enterprise it is necessary to claim absolute confidence in its success. Similar claims may be important in communicating up and/or down a hierarchy. At worst, he could lie, but regular lies would probably increase the level of stress associated with the endeavor. Overcoming Bias may reduce stress-alleviating doublethink.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420416 Stuart Armstrong Sun, 08 Apr 2007 09:47:48 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420416 <i>This shouldn't be happening. Please amplify.</i> Not talking about investing here, but actual business/management decisions. I've never been deeply involved myself, but my father and most of our family friends are, and I've seen them at work, as well as my own bosses. The main quality that seems required by a business manager is to make very rapid decisions in the certainty that they are correct. The decision has to be good, or at least passable; but the ability to make them fast is essential, and the belief that they're correct is even more so. "Acting on your instincts" is what is needed; the market separates the good instincts from the bad, but doesn't much improve the instincts of those that survive. Now that I've realised the caveats and uncertainties that go behind even firm scientific statements, I can't summon up the self-confident certainty that would be needed in the business world. Academia is different, because accuracy is prized over speed - you have to be right, not "the first to be semi-right". This shouldn’t be happening. Please amplify.

Not talking about investing here, but actual business/management decisions. I’ve never been deeply involved myself, but my father and most of our family friends are, and I’ve seen them at work, as well as my own bosses.

The main quality that seems required by a business manager is to make very rapid decisions in the certainty that they are correct. The decision has to be good, or at least passable; but the ability to make them fast is essential, and the belief that they’re correct is even more so. “Acting on your instincts” is what is needed; the market separates the good instincts from the bad, but doesn’t much improve the instincts of those that survive.

Now that I’ve realised the caveats and uncertainties that go behind even firm scientific statements, I can’t summon up the self-confident certainty that would be needed in the business world.

Academia is different, because accuracy is prized over speed – you have to be right, not “the first to be semi-right”.

]]> By: Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420415 Eliezer Yudkowsky Sun, 08 Apr 2007 07:16:06 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420415 "It's also making me better at academia, and worse at business. I can live with that." This shouldn't be happening. Please amplify. “It’s also making me better at academia, and worse at business. I can live with that.”

This shouldn’t be happening. Please amplify.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420414 Stuart Armstrong Sun, 08 Apr 2007 06:43:33 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420414 For me, "overcoming bias" is good for trying to actually progress in answering important questions, rather than just going round and round in the same old arguments. And that means a lot for me. It's also making me better at academia, and worse at business. I can live with that. For me, “overcoming bias” is good for trying to actually progress in answering important questions, rather than just going round and round in the same old arguments. And that means a lot for me.

It’s also making me better at academia, and worse at business. I can live with that.

]]> By: Ian Stuart http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420413 Ian Stuart Sun, 08 Apr 2007 03:23:08 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/04/overcoming-bias-what-is-it-good-for.html#comment-420413 Matthew said: "Why should I be moral?" (To think that the only answer to the latter question is, "Because there's something in it for you," is to be caught up in a fundamentally egoistic picture of morality, to think that morality is supposed to pay.) --------------- If morality turns out to be a net negative endeavor, if there is in fact nothing in it for me, then I don't believe that asking "Why should I be moral?" is a silly question. It may just be one more bias to address. Perhaps the "Me" in "What's in it for me?" needs to be read as 'humanity', or 'sentient beings', but if there is nothing in it for 'us' then why do we practice it? It must be the 'right' thing to do for some (hopefully positive) reason. Matthew said:
“Why should I be moral?” (To think that the only answer to the latter question is, “Because there’s something in it for you,” is to be caught up in a fundamentally egoistic picture of morality, to think that morality is supposed to pay.)

—————

If morality turns out to be a net negative endeavor, if there is in fact nothing in it for me, then I don’t believe that asking “Why should I be moral?” is a silly question. It may just be one more bias to address.
Perhaps the “Me” in “What’s in it for me?” needs to be read as ‘humanity’, or ‘sentient beings’, but if there is nothing in it for ‘us’ then why do we practice it? It must be the ‘right’ thing to do for some (hopefully positive) reason.

]]>