Difference between revisions of "Smoking lesion"

From Lesswrongwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (moved Smoker's lesion to Smoking lesion: consistency)
(See also)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
Naive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_decision_theory causal decision theory] says "yes", and naive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidential_decision_theory evidential decision theory] says "no".
 
Naive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_decision_theory causal decision theory] says "yes", and naive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidential_decision_theory evidential decision theory] says "no".
 +
 +
==Blog posts==
 +
 +
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/164/timeless_decision_theory_and_metacircular Timeless Decision Theory and Meta-Circular Decision Theory]
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==

Revision as of 05:33, 26 April 2010

The smoker's lesion is a problem in decision theory:

Smoking strongly correlated with lung cancer, but in the world of the Smoker's Lesion, this correlation is understood to be because of a common cause—a genetic lesion that tends to cause both smoking and cancer. Once we fix the presence or absence of the lesion, there is no additional correlation between smoking and cancer.
Suppose you prefer smoking without cancer to not smoking without

cancer, and prefer smoking with cancer to not smoking with cancer. Should you smoke?

Naive causal decision theory says "yes", and naive evidential decision theory says "no".

Blog posts

See also