Online Mind Mapping and Brainstorming

Create your own awesome maps

Online Mind Mapping and Brainstorming

Even on the go

with our free apps for iPhone, iPad and Android

Get Started

Already have an account? Log In

FFAI Sources of Disagreements by Mind Map: FFAI Sources of Disagreements
0.0 stars - reviews range from 0 to 5

FFAI Sources of Disagreements

why do people disagree

objective differences

using language of logic...

different definitions: people are talking about different things

invalid arguments: there is an objective error in reasoning somehwere

valid but unsound arguments: premises are objectively wrong

subjective differences

different beliefs, belief = psychological state to which someone holds a proposition to be true, beliefs correspond to prior probability in Bayesian statistics, beliefs can be based on hereditary biases or experience, beliefs can be rational or irrational, beliefs can be inconsistent (that's the norm; making beliefs consistent is computationally hard)

different preferences, cost / values = numerical measure by which we rank preferences, same variations as for beliefs: hereditary / experience, rational / irrational, consistent / inconsistent

meta-level differences

pay-off and meta pay-off, arguments themselves usually involves some soft of cost/benefit analysis, arguments also themselves have a pay-off: look smart, get someone to act some way

deceit, assumptions: arguments are about objective truth, reality: arguments are about achieving one of many possible goals

emotional influence, cause people to act in a certain way independent of the logic of the argument itself, often achieved via "framing" and "dysphemism"


understanding of arguments and subjectivity connects closely with forms of reasoning in AI

logic, Bayesian inference = objective differences between individuals

prior probabilities, cost functions = subjective differences between individuals

game theory = understanding deceit, rhetoric, etc.

points to keep in mind

subjective differences are inevitable

people are biologically different in terms of risks and preferences

mathematically, there is no reason to prefer one set of priors and cost functions to another

empirically, some choices of priors and cost functions survive evolutionarily, but such choices are not stable over time

e.g., priors and cost functions corresponding to altruism and cooperation are good sometimes and not good at others

subjectivity impacts arguments

you cannot be totally objective even if you try

reasoning and arguments are always influenced by subjective beliefs, often unconsciously, even if you try to avoid such influence

subjective differences can be altered by rhetoric and empathy, but not logic

framing and non-neutral language can influence subjective beliefs

assumptions about subjectivity

in arguments, people frequently make assumptions about their own objectivity and the biases of others

generally, insufficient allowance is made for the possibility that differences in conclusions are due to differences in valid beliefs or valid cost functions

labels and stereotypes

group membership, labels, and stereotypes often influence assumptions about bias in others

some labels give you valid information about someone's beliefs, premises, and biases; others do not