Warrigal comments on Open Thread: April 2010, Part 2 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Unnamed 08 April 2010 03:09AM

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

Comments (194)

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

Comment author: CannibalSmith 08 April 2010 12:34:32PM -1 points [-]

Help me, LessWrong. I want to build a case for

  1. Information is a terminal value without exception.
  2. All information is inherently good.
  3. We must gather and preserve information for its own sake.

These phrasings should mean the exact same thing. Correct me if they don't.

Elaboration: Most people readily agree that most information is good most of the time. I want to see if I can go all the way and build a convincing argument that all information is good all of the time, or as close to it as I can get. That misuse of information is problem about the misuser and not the information ("guns don't kill people"). Specific cases include: endangered species (DNA is best stored in living organisms), viruses (all three kinds), forbidden books, child pornography and other shocking information, free speech, Archive.org, The Rosetta Project, research on race.

Please post arguments and counterarguments in their own comments and separately from general discussion comments.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2010 04:26:44AM 0 points [-]

Reading what you have said in this thread, I was confident that you were committing the fallacy of rationalization. Your statement is simple, and it seems like reality can be made to fit it, so you do so. But your name looked familiar, and so I clicked on it, and found that your karma is higher than mine, which seems to be strong evidence that you would not commit such a fallacy, using phrases so revealing as "I want to build a case for . . .".

Your words say you are rationalizing; your karma says you are not. I am confused.

Comment author: Morendil 09 April 2010 07:08:59AM 0 points [-]

Argument screens off karma. ;)

I agree with you about "I want to build a case", the phrasing is unfortunate. However I note that the OP asked for arguments on both "sides".

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2010 11:09:38PM 0 points [-]

The OP asked for a specific thing to be done with arguments on both sides. "Please place garbage in the bin in the corner" doesn't mean I want the bin to contain more garbage.

Or maybe you're not referring to "Please post arguments and . . ."