If you understand a problem well enough, you've already solved it. So, if you understand why X is bad, you've understood what the better alternative is
( Read more... )
* There is no such thing as a 'solved' problem in that it is always possible that there are better solutions than the one you have found. * Full understanding is unattainable. * Thus the problem is a practical one, similar to the principle of sufficient criticism: When should we focus on looking for better solutions, and when should we stop looking and focus on developing the best solution we have found so far?
Re: TL;DR versionubermammalJuly 7 2009, 22:41:03 UTC
Some solutions (theories) are inherently bad and we can rule them out before even seeking criticism. We do this internally all the time. Better solutions should always be desired and we look for new ones to explain a problem better only when the old one is proven false. Because of our fallibility we are never able to discern when the perfect solution to a problem presents itself. We can continue to use a falsified solution as it hasn't changed by being proven wrong (we assumed it wasn't absolute truth when we made it) and it hasn't changed since yesterday
( ... )
Re: TL;DR versionubermammalJuly 7 2009, 23:49:49 UTC
> Better solutions should always be desired and we look for new ones to explain a problem better only when the old one is proven false.
"Only" when the old one is proven false? Even when we have already got a working solution to a problem, we may be 'inspired' with a new solution that is more efficient. "The old solution is false" is sufficient but not necessary to come up with a new solution.
> 'focus on developing the best solution' -- in what way do you mean?
Sorry, that wasn't as clear as it could have been. I meant 'to take the best solution, and focus on developing it,' i.e. to being criticising it or acting on it.
> In the problem of how to escape a jail cell, a possible solution is to ask the guard for the keys. If you meant to escape through the physical wall directly then that is a different problem-situation than escaping your jail cell.
If a possible solution is to ask the guard for the keys, then it is indeed a different problem-situation than the one in which it is not a possible solution to ask the guard for the
( ... )
Re: TL;DR versionjollyrancher6July 8 2009, 20:57:33 UTC
>My issue is: having considered my theories and picked the best one, should I then begin acting on that theory, exploring the new problems it generates, etc - or should I keep trying to conjecture more theories in case I find a better one
( ... )
* Full understanding is unattainable.
* Thus the problem is a practical one, similar to the principle of sufficient criticism: When should we focus on looking for better solutions, and when should we stop looking and focus on developing the best solution we have found so far?
Reply
Reply
Reply
"Only" when the old one is proven false? Even when we have already got a working solution to a problem, we may be 'inspired' with a new solution that is more efficient. "The old solution is false" is sufficient but not necessary to come up with a new solution.
> 'focus on developing the best solution' -- in what way do you mean?
Sorry, that wasn't as clear as it could have been. I meant 'to take the best solution, and focus on developing it,' i.e. to being criticising it or acting on it.
> In the problem of how to escape a jail cell, a possible solution is to ask the guard for the keys. If you meant to escape through the physical wall directly then that is a different problem-situation than escaping your jail cell.
If a possible solution is to ask the guard for the keys, then it is indeed a different problem-situation than the one in which it is not a possible solution to ask the guard for the ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment