James_K comments on High Status and Stupidity: Why? - Less Wrong

34 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 12 January 2010 04:36PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (142)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: magfrump 13 January 2010 04:18:48AM *  -1 points [-]

I am far from convinced that Stalin is "high-status"--at the very least most socialists I know disavow him.

On the other hand I agree that Gandalf is a fictional character. A couple of counterexamples quickly came to mind then failed, I'd be interested to see a larger list:

Gandhi: disowned his son for getting married who then committed suicide; told women not to fight against rape.

I'm not thinking of a good one for Lincoln, Einstein, MLKJ. Any evidence against them? I'd be surprised to see it about Einstein.

ETA: Clearly Stalin was high status when leading the USSR, and perhaps continues to be, I seem to have slipped into non-LW-mode for that sentence. My question of whether other, commonly-though-of-as-kinder public figures are less gandalf-like still stands.

Comment author: James_K 13 January 2010 05:32:32AM 9 points [-]

I am far from convinced that Stalin is "high-status"--at the very least most socialists I know disavow him.

That may be true now, but Stalin was pretty high status while he was in charge of the USSR.

Comment author: magfrump 13 January 2010 07:42:04AM *  3 points [-]

EDIT: Comment rescinded due to being dumb.

Comment author: scav 13 January 2010 03:58:01PM 2 points [-]

Status is not the same as popularity. Besides, it's just an ape thing - you don't have to intrinsically value it, and so feel bad about acknowledging the high status of someone you don't like.