Vladimir_Nesov comments on Ben Goertzel: The Singularity Institute's Scary Idea (and Why I Don't Buy It) - Less Wrong

32 Post author: ciphergoth 30 October 2010 09:31AM

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

Comments (432)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 19 November 2010 08:51:12PM *  2 points [-]

There are no correct answers in a dispute about definitions, only aesthetic judgments and sometimes considerations of the danger of hidden implicit inferences. You can't use authority in such an argument, unless of course you appeal to common usage.

However, referring to a book without giving an annotation for why it's relevant is definitely an incorrect way to argue (even if a convincing argument is contained therein).

Comment author: timtyler 19 November 2010 08:57:10PM -1 points [-]

Disputes about the definition of "evolution"? I don't think there are too many of those. Mark Ridley is the main one that springs to mind, but his definition is pretty crazy, IMHO.

Why the book is relevant appears to be already being made pretty explicit in the subtitle: "An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science".