= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JGWeissman comments on "Life Experience" as a Conversation-Halter - 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 (65)
It seems marginal to me. In its favor, it is an idea that should be said out loud. But it should be better supported.
I think this article would benifet from some real world examples of people playing the "life experience" card in support of a wrong position, or that "life experience" conveniently tends to support policies that favor those with lots of "life experience" at the expense of those with less. Or if, by some improbability, the "life experience" argument is only ever made in support of correct positions, then it would still be good to illustrate how a more detailed argument, entangled with the actual issue being discussed, is more likely to convince the other than an appeal to general "life experience".
I have a recent example - discussing cryonics with my father-in-law. He supported my choice to do it, but is convinced that when I reach his age I will feel differently about it.
Personally, I would have thought that adding on another 25 years of precious experience and accumulated physical damage would make me more likely to want to preserve/fix myself.
Yes - I believe yours is the correct analysis.