Changing the subject slightly: the optimal use of probabilities is NOT always the best foundation for action.

I say this because of a news report I heard a few months back (on NPR: sorry, I can't remember the reference), about a math student who was very bright, and whose professor decided to play a trick on him, because he was fed up with the student doing his assignements in no time flat. The professor quietly inserted an 'impossible' math problem in the guy's next assignment. The problem was 'impossible' because it had been attacked repeatedly by many brilliant mathematicians, for (IIRC) centuries, with little or no progress. The student then took an extraordinary length of time to complete the assigment, but handed it in eventually, with comments about the "trouble he had with problem 6".

As you might have guessed, he solved the problem. His comment afterwards was that he was glad that his professor did not tell him about the reputation that this problem had, because if he had known, he would never have believed in himself enough to try to solve it.

In this case, better knowledge of the probability of success would (probably) have been detrimental to his goal.

But that is because if he had known the problem was an unsolved problem, he would have incorrectly UNDERestimated his probability of solving it in the allotted time....

So, yeah, if you make one mistake, sometimes making another mistake can partly fix the problem. Two wrongs sometimes really do make a right.

This is actually a relevant point for mind design: If a mind is going to make probabilistic errors (which is necessary given complex goals and limited resources), it's better if some of these errors cancel out like this clever student's did ;-) .... In this case, big errors regarding smaller things may partly cancel out leaving smaller errors regarding bigger things. Novamente definitely tries to make us of this principle..

-- Ben

-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303

Reply via email to