Shut Up and Multiply

The specific application of Shut Up and Multiply to the Torture versus Dust SpecsSpecks case has proven quite contentious. One reason this case was cited as an exemplar of where "shut up and multiply" should apply was a claim that the usual reasoning behind answering "SPECKS" can be reduced to circular preferences.

Due to scope neglect, framing effects, and other cognitive biases, the result of an expected utility calculation executed correctly may produce an answer different from first intuition, making it "intuitively unappealing".  If you can tell that it's probably the intuitions that went wrong and not the calculation, the skill shut up and multiply is the ability to accept that, yes, sometimes the expected utility math is correct and we need to deal with that. Contrast do the math, then go with your gut.  If you're not sure which of these applies, use "do the math, then go whatwith your gut" until you've built up more experience.

Due to scope neglect, framing effects, and other cognitive biases, the result of an expected utility calculation executed correctly may be intuitively unappealing, perhaps even horrifying. And yet, intuition isproduce an answer different from first intuition, making it "intuitively unappealing".  If you can tell that it's probably the intuitions that went wrong and not the most reliable guide for what policies will actually producecalculation, the best results, particularly in cases where we can actually do calculations with the relevant quantities. The ability toskill shut up and multiply, is the ability to trustaccept that, yes, sometimes the expected utility math even when it feels wrongis a key rationalist skill. correct and we need to deal with that. Contrast do the math, then go with your gut.  If you're not sure which of these applies, use "do the math, then go what your gut" until you've built up more experience.

The specific application of Shut Up and Multiply to the Torture versus Dust Specs case has proven quite contentious. One reason this case was cited as an exemplar of where "shut up and multiply" should apply was a claim that the usual reasoning behind answering "SPECKS" can be reduced to circular preferences.