The Rule-Following Paradox: Why Law Can't Be Fully Coded
sanmikoyejo · x · 2026-10-29
Part two of the thread applies tacit knowledge to rule-following. Citing the Wittgenstein/Kripke rule-following paradox — any behavior can be interpreted as following any rule — the author uses the classic 'No Vehicles in the Park' example to show interpretation is unavoidable. A CS-trained author reflects that while he once believed law could and should be fully coded, Lorraine Daston's book 'Rules' and tacit knowledge convinced him the gap between letter and spirit makes that impossible.
More from AGI Musings
- Robotics experts push back on GPT-7-Robot hype: LLMs are 100x larger than VLAs — silver__tsuki · 2026-10-29
- What C.S. Lewis' 1939 Wartime Lecture Teaches About Living Through the AI Transition — luke_drago_ · 2026-10-29
- AI x Bio researchers decry 'active avoidance of scholarship' in the field — anshulkundaje · 2026-10-29
- Writing about AI publicly exposes just how bad some respected people's OOD reasoning is — jd_pressman · 2026-10-29
- zetalyrae: alignment debates assume ASI can 'enumerate the real numbers' — zetalyrae · 2026-10-29
- 'A bad napkin sketch beats any prompt': creators lack the language to brief AI agents — AIFlow_ML · 2026-10-29