Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

Paul Grobstein's picture

less wrong = more useful?

Yeah, there is, for better and for worse, a long "less wrong" history. And no, it shouldn't be understood as implying there is a "right." Neither in the sense that there is a fixed long term objective nor even in the sense that at any given time, there is a single alternative that is better than all other alternatives. The basic idea the phrase is intended to convey is that we are always exploring from the present, needing to find ways to deal with present problems, that we can choose not to go in directions that have known problems and instead to conceive/try other directions, but that leaves still an infinite number of possible directions to explore.

"less wrong" means "notice and fix some local problem" with a new solution, one that hasn't been tried before (as, in the context of science, account for a new observation that one couldn't account for with existing stories in ways that create new challenges). "more useful" could well be understood to mean the same thing, but would, I suspect, equally call to mind some things that one doesn't intend by it.

Are there ways to use words that don't do that? The answer, in general, is probably no. But that doesn't mean one shouldn't try to get it less wrong, more useful in particular cases/local circumstances.  Thanks.  Let's keep working on it in this particular case.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
6 + 10 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.