orthonormal comments on The scourge of perverse-mindedness - Less Wrong

95 Post author: simplicio 21 March 2010 07:08AM

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

Comments (249)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: orthonormal 21 March 2010 06:07:59PM 5 points [-]

We're evolutionarily optimized for the savannah, not for the stars. It doesn't seem to me that our present selves are really as capable of being effortlessly content with our worldview as some of our forebears were, because we have some lingering Wrong Questions and wrong expectations written into our minds. Some part of us really wants to see agency in the basic causal framework of our lives, as much as we know this isn't so.

Now that's not a final prescription for hopelessness, because we can hope not to be running on the same bug-riddled brainware for our entire existence, and because there do exist ways to make the universe much more interesting than it presently is.

But it does mean that it's not a moral failing to be disillusioned with the world, now and then, in a way that our religious next-door neighbor isn't. Taking it to an extreme can signify a lack of understanding and imagination, but some amount of it may well be proper for now.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 21 March 2010 09:20:14PM 0 points [-]

I think you have an extra negation in the first sentence of your last paragraph?

Comment author: orthonormal 21 March 2010 09:26:29PM 0 points [-]

No, I think it's right as written. Our religious next-door neighbor may not feel disillusioned, and we might, and this is not necessarily a moral failing in us.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 21 March 2010 09:43:49PM 0 points [-]

Oh, whoops. I accidentally read the "does" as a "doesn't", reading the extra negation right into there...