= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NeitherMaleNorFemale comments on Sayeth the Girl - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (486)
Sorry if this has already been said, but, to quote a friend, what would constitute a sweeping generalization varies widely. Some people would read this as being close to equivalent to saying 'Don't use heuristics when dealing with stuff related to women', which is impossible and imposes major costs. You can't engage in discussions if you're not allowed to use heuristics.
Probably not. But some heuristics create benefit for you by causing harm to others. Endorsing such a heuristic as acceptable to use entails either:
1) Disputing, on an empirical basis, the existence or amount of harm caused by the heuristic, or
2) Asserting, on an empirical basis, the existence and magnitude of the benefit you receive, or
3) Accepting the harm to others as unproblematic because you receive any benefit at all by using it.
In short, the strongest version of the argument you challenge says that the costs to others of certain heuristics outweigh the benefits received by the heuristics users. Assuming that the generalizations are accurate enough to be considered heuristics.