= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Perplexed comments on Less Wrong: Open Thread, September 2010 - 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 (610)
Both. Though actually, I didn't say the justification was wrong. I said it was bullshit. It is offered only to distract oneself and to distract others.
Is it really possible that you don't see this choice of justification as manipulative? Is it possible that being manipulated does not make you angry?
You're discounting the reasoning showing that Eliezer's behavior is consistent with him being a good guy and claiming that it is merely a distraction. You haven't justified those statements -- they are supposed to be "obvious".
What do you think you know and how do you think you know it? You make statements about the real motivations of Eliezer Yudkowsky. Do you know how you have arrived at those beliefs?
I don't recall seeing any such reasoning.
Did I? Where? What I am pretty sure I have expressed is that I distrust all self-serving claims about real motivations. Nothing personal - I tend to mistrust all claims of benevolence from powerful individuals, whether they be religious leaders, politicians, or fiction writers. Since Eliezer fits all three categories, he gets some extra scrutiny.