SilasBarta comments on Build Small Skills in the Right Order - Less Wrong

90 Post author: lukeprog 17 April 2011 11:01PM

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

Comments (213)

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

Comment author: David_Gerard 18 April 2011 08:49:08PM *  6 points [-]

(splutter) That's probably more hazardous than Scientology, yes.

An important thing for the strong to realise when talking about hazards is that other people may not be as strong.

Comment author: SilasBarta 18 April 2011 08:50:21PM 5 points [-]

Trying cigarettes is more dangerous than trying Scientology classes?

Comment author: jtk3 18 April 2011 10:57:36PM 11 points [-]

Surely more people die from it.

Comment author: bbarth 19 April 2011 02:36:50AM 1 point [-]

I don't think people become addicted by TRYING a cigarette. It takes several if not dozens or more. The physical dependence is acquired and comes by degrees.

Comment author: jtk3 19 April 2011 05:34:39AM 2 points [-]

People don't typically get trapped in Scientology by trying it out either.

But if you try a cigarette there's some risk you'll want to smoke another and then another.

I'm confident smoking is a bigger danger to me than Scientology.

Comment author: bbarth 19 April 2011 01:47:39PM 1 point [-]

Agreed. I just sounded like this discussion was trending into hyperbole about the dangers of smoking.

Comment author: David_Gerard 18 April 2011 08:53:52PM *  0 points [-]

More reliably addictive, I expect. I must admit I don't know of any comparative studies.

Mind you, Scientologists notoriously smoke like chimneys. Because not smoking enough will cause lung cancer. Hey, you could always bum a smoke from Ron.

Comment author: SilasBarta 18 April 2011 08:59:55PM 10 points [-]

For a proper comparison, you wouldn't just consider addictiveness, but also the harm resulting from becoming addicted. It's not obvious to me which does more expected lifetime damage to you.

Cigarettes (chain smoker): Spend a lot of your money, become uglier and smellier, get excluded from lots of places, lose health while alive and die earlier, lose some connection to family and friends

Scientology: Spend a lot of your money (probably more than a chain smoker on cigarettes), eviscerate your thinking ability, lose most connection to family and friends outside of Scientology.

Is the health hit worse than the mind hit? I really don't know.

Comment author: David_Gerard 18 April 2011 09:02:26PM 2 points [-]

With Scientology, there's a bit more of a lottery effect: if you lose, you can lose big. Cigarettes are more gradually hazardous (with a bit of a lottery effect).

Comment author: Davorak 19 April 2011 01:14:29PM 1 point [-]

If you had to choose to be one or the other which would it be?

Comment author: David_Gerard 19 April 2011 03:47:26PM *  3 points [-]

Well, I already know far too much about Scientology, to the point where I used so much of the jargon that an ex-Scientologist on IRC many years ago refused to believe I wasn't an ex-member ... and I used to smoke (and still tend to bum cigs when sufficiently drunk). So the actual answer appears to be "both", though more the cigarettes.