= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Unknowns comments on Bizarre Illusions - 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 (305)
I grant the reflex is a way of your body protesting. I just don't think it has to do with TASTE. And I gave evidence for that from the the fact that if it is diluted, it has the same taste, but not the same protest.
Also, this reflex is different from nausea, which I would admit would be a protest to the taste, and if I dislike the taste of something sufficiently, it causes nausea in me. Nothing like this happens with alcoholic drinks.
Dilution doesn't change the taste of a drink, and alcohol doesn't cause nausea ...
And I'm the one that's rationalizing a refuted position?
1)dilution weakens the taste (and the other effects like the choking protest), but it doesn't change it to another taste; 2) I'm not talking about getting drunk, I'm talking about the effect at the moment of drinking it.
Would someone like to make a falsifiable claim about how a person is likely to react to alcohol over their first few instances of drinking it? If so, I'd be willing to be a guinea pig.
The only times I've had alcohol were over a decade ago, and involved either having communion at church or my father insisting that I take a sip of his beer. I've never experienced an alcohol buzz. I dislike being in the kinds of situations in which one would drink socially, but am curious about how alcohol might affect me separately from that. I do find the smell of wine and beer aversive (but not nauseating), which I understand might affect the outcome, but I'd be willing to try them anyway. (I'd been considering trying wine coolers, but, hey, it's for science.)
Given that you don't like the smell of beer and wine, you likely won't like the taste at first either. But some people do like the taste even the first time, so this isn't strong evidence for SilasBarta's position.
You might like wine coolers which tend to be a little sweeter. Actually, one thing correct in Silas's position is that many people like sweet drinks because they are sweet, not because of the alcohol, and they are sometimes unwilling to admit this for social reasons.
Sure, I'd love to make such a prediction, but those who disagree with me know all too well what the result will be and will try to rationalize away the predictable results of you trying alcohol ... oops, too late.
I don't think anyone disputes that people usually don't like alcohol the first time they try it. I'm disputing that, after liking it, there's a difference between this liking of alcohol and the liking of your apt example, milkshakes. The two likes are the same.
No, they're not the same, because you have to go through a process to like alcohol, which would just the same cause you to like bat urine. You don't have to do that for milkshakes.
After that process has happened, they're the same.
Yes, once you use a process that will cause people to like ANYTHING, including bat urine, it will cause them to like alcohol.
If you look closely, that statement has no information content, and it's equivalent to yours.
"Anything" is too broad. If you made drinking bat urine sufficiently high-status, or gave it some reward other than taste, then yes; otherwise, no.
EDIT: Taste in this case = "pleasure from first taste"
So make predictions about what will happen after I've had N drinks. Or what would happen after I had N drinks of near-beer, if it's the psychological effect you're concerned with and not just the social one.