Vladimir_Nesov comments on Open Thread, April 2011 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: ata 02 April 2011 06:43PM

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

Comments (109)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 03 April 2011 09:07:03AM 0 points [-]

Sequences are a specific method of addressing this situation, not a general reference. I don't believe individual references would be helpful, instead I suggest systematic training. I wrote:

I believe it's a bad idea to argue about ideologies on object level, they tend to have too many anti-epistemic defenses to make it efficient or even productive, rather one should learn a load of good thinking skills that would add up to eventually fixing the problem.

You'd need to address this argument, not just state a deontological maxim that one shouldn't send people to read the sequences.

Comment author: David_Gerard 03 April 2011 09:09:44AM *  -1 points [-]

I wasn't stating a deontological maxim - I was pointing that you were being bloody rude in a highly unproductive manner that's bad for the site as a whole. "I suggest you try not to do that."

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 03 April 2011 09:32:25AM *  5 points [-]

Again, you fail to address the actual argument. Maybe the right thing to do is to stay silent, you could argue that. But I don't believe that pointing out references to individual ideas would be helpful in this case.

Also, consider "read the sequences" as a form of book recommendation. Book recommendations are generally not considered "bloody rude". If you never studied topology, and want to understand Smirnov metrization theorem, "study the textbook" is the right kind of advice.

Actually changing your mind is an advanced exercise.