CarlShulman comments on Undiscriminating Skepticism - Less Wrong

97 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 March 2010 11:23PM

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

Comments (1329)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CarlShulman 15 March 2010 01:20:54AM 5 points [-]

The "skeptic" tries to scare you away from the belief in their very first opening remarks: for example, pointing out how UFO cults beat and starve their victims (when this can just as easily happen if aliens are visiting the Earth). The negative consequences of a false belief may be real, legitimate truths to be communicated; but only after you establish by other means that the belief is factually false - otherwise it's the logical fallacy of appeal to consequences.

This can be legitimate for a reporter wanting someone to read the story, and to show why the subject of the story matters practically.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 15 March 2010 03:29:19AM 2 points [-]

Perhaps, but to the same extent, we should discount reporters' accounts as informative or worthy of being taken as serious arguments. In other words, you want to play-a the grownup game, you play-a by the grownup rules; if your editor says you can't, too bad, go sit at the kids' table.