Possible Cockatrice in written form

Aurini

My various interweb browsings stumbled me upon a potential Cockatrice in written, philisophical form. I've thus far read through the first chapter, and it is less anti-rational than most philosophical writings.

I'm reading through it right now, and will provide my feedback when I'm done, likely as a front-page post.

Personally, I'm a Fatalist, with some sort of Weird Soldier Ethic, who plans to go out the same way that Hunter did (if the cops don't get me first), but I've got a bunch of nonsense to Write first. I figure that'll make me somewhat immune. That aside, I doubt it's a real cockatrice - or we would've heard about it before.

It is a strong exercise in Nihilism. So, with those cautions given, I offer it to you: an extensive suicide letter.

Tip of the hat to this guy.

I'm reading through it right now, and will provide my feedback when I'm done, likely as a front-page post.

It is a strong exercise in Nihilism. So, with those cautions given, I offer it to you: an extensive suicide letter.

Tip of the hat to this guy.

I don't think this post deserves the downvotes it's getting. The comments are better than the post, but I think that's productive for the discussion section.

As I've said in the comments, I consider how to deal with possible basilisks a real issue that rationalists really seriously need an approach to. A rationalism that fails to deal with possible basilisks ... fails.

(I don't consider the linked PDF worthy of being called a basilisk. But YMMV, of course.)

Edit: Actually, I agree with AndrewHickey - even if it's not a basilisk it deserves downvotes for dickishness, or close enough resemblance not to make effective difference.

I don't think this post deserves the downvotes it's getting.

I downvoted it because I would like to see fewer links to crackpot rants.

8[anonymous]15y

In my case I downvoted because the author of the post considers it a basilisk. I'm not entirely convinced that basilisks exist in any real sense, and definitely agree with you that rationalists need an approach to them; but unless and until there is an approach, if you think some piece of information will cause illness or death (without positive results), it's morally wrong to share it. Thus, even though I think this 'basilisk' utterly harmless, I am not convinced all 'basilisks' are, and don't want people to keep posting things they consider harmful until there's a way of dealing with them. So on the basis of 'downvote if you want to see fewer posts like this' I downvoted.

-10

Possible Cockatrice in written form

-10

-10

-10

Possible Cockatrice in written form

-10

-10