= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid comments on Some Thoughts Are Too Dangerous For Brains to Think - 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 (311)
My hypothesis is that this is a "realist"/"idealist" divide. Or, to put it another way, one camp is more concerned with being right and the other is more concerned with doing the right thing. ("Right" means two totally different things, here.)
Quality of my post aside (and it really wasn't very good), I think that's where the dividing line has been in the comments.
Similarly, I think most people who value PUA here value it because it works, and most people who oppose it do so on ethical or idealistic grounds. Ditto discussions of status.
The reason the arguments between these camps are so unfruitful, then, is that we're sorting of arguing past each other. We're using different heuristics to evaluate desirability, and then we're surprised when we get different results; I'm as guilty of this as anyone.
(Prompted by but completely irrelevant to the recent bump.)
Come now. This is lesswrong. It is an "idealist"/"idealist" divide with slightly different ideals. :P
One side's ideal just happens to be "verbal symbols should be used to further epistemic accuracy". It is very much an 'ethical or idealistic' position with all the potential for narrow mindedness that entails.