rhollerith_dot_com comments on Forager Anthropology - Less Wrong

11 Post author: WrongBot 28 July 2010 05:48AM

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

Comments (133)

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

Comment author: pjeby 29 July 2010 07:35:00PM 9 points [-]

Even poorly reasoned posts can lead to interesting discussions, as I think WrongBot’s posts have.

Indeed. I upvoted this post and the other on this topic because they contained interesting information that was new to me, and since I "like and want more of that", they deserve upvoting on that basis.

I do think that both posts contain a bit too much whaling on the strawman of "the standard narrative" and could do without it altogether, but at the same time I don't see why people are so focused on arguing with that. It's almost like a sacred cow is being threatened, or that WrongBot has previously been identified as an enemy outsider due to having supported polyamory.

(IOW, I see some of the reaction to WrongBot as greater evidence of emotional involvement by people other than WrongBot.)

Comment author: rhollerith_dot_com 29 July 2010 07:57:15PM *  0 points [-]

I see some of the reaction to WrongBot as greater evidence of emotional involvement by people other than WrongBot.

For example, people's emotional involvement with Malthus's assertion that human populations increase at an exponential rate absent limits on resources :) ?

ADDED. I retract this comment since (I now realize) PJ wrote some of the reaction, and obviously I cannot refute what PJ wrote by listing instances in which the reaction was justified on rational grounds.

Comment author: pjeby 30 July 2010 03:02:59AM 2 points [-]

Er, you did see the word some in there, right?

Comment author: rhollerith_dot_com 30 July 2010 03:10:05AM 2 points [-]

Upvoted, and grandparent retracted.