gwern comments on Open Thread: March 2010 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: AdeleneDawner 01 March 2010 09:25AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (658)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (658)

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

Comment author: Alicorn 04 March 2010 02:06:02AM 3 points [-]

"Game" is one of the most notorious words in the language for the virtual impossibility of providing a unified definition absent counterexamples.

Comment author: gwern 04 March 2010 02:22:39AM *  0 points [-]

A family resemblance is still a resemblance.

"The sense of a sentence - one would like to say - may, of course, leave this or that open, but the sentence must nevertheless have a definite sense. An indefinite sense - that would really not be a sense at all. - This is like: An indefinite boundary is not really a boundary at all. Here one thinks perhaps: if I say 'I have locked the man up fast in the room - there is only one door left open' - then I simply haven't locked him in at all; his being locked in is a sham. One would be inclined to say here: 'You haven't done anything at all'. An enclosure with a hole in it is as good as none. - But is that true?"

Comment author: radical_negative_one 06 March 2010 10:36:09PM 0 points [-]

Could you include a source for this quote, please?

Comment author: gwern 07 March 2010 12:55:18AM *  -2 points [-]

Googling it would've told you that it's from Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations.

Comment author: JGWeissman 07 March 2010 01:37:08AM 1 point [-]

Simply Googling it would not have signaled any disappointment radical_negative_one may have had that you did not include a citation (preferably with a relevant link) as is normal when making a quote like that.

Comment author: gwern 07 March 2010 02:24:16AM -1 points [-]

/me bats the social signal into JGWeissman's court

Omitting the citation, which wasn't really needed, sends the message that I don't wish to stand on Wittgenstein's authority but think the sentiment stands on its own.

Comment author: wedrifid 07 March 2010 02:41:51AM *  2 points [-]

Then use your own words. Wittgenstein's are barely readable.

Comment deleted 07 March 2010 02:49:08AM [-]
Comment author: RobinZ 07 March 2010 02:30:23AM 1 point [-]

If it doesn't stand on its own, you shouldn't quote it at all - the purpose of the citation is to allow interested parties to investigate the original source, not to help you convince.

Comment author: JGWeissman 07 March 2010 02:39:54AM 0 points [-]

Voted up, but I would say the purpose is to do both, to help convince and help further investigation, and more, such as to give credit to the source. Citations benifet the reader, the quoter, and the source.

I definitely agree that willingness to forgo your own benifet as the quoter does not justify ignoring the benifets to the others involved.

Comment author: RobinZ 07 March 2010 08:08:00PM 0 points [-]

You're right, of course.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit