Kaj_Sotala comments on Coercion is far - Less Wrong

-6 Post author: saliency 16 May 2011 12:37AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (13)
Tags: near/far

Comments (13)

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

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 17 May 2011 09:28:43AM 1 point [-]

On readability when I say the below what do you think? "I thought that coercion may be one of the mechanisms that have enabled humans to engage and execute long term plans."

This particular sentence was easy to read. The next one was not.

To say it a different way. People often don't engage in long-term action that are good for them because they are unable to overcome their resistance to paying the short term costs. Leaders, those in a group able to exercise coercion, are no different but have the ability to coerce members into paying the short-term costs leading them to engage in more long-term action.

And this is much better than the original. In particular, the role of leaders was not originally clear.

Comment author: saliency 17 May 2011 04:29:00PM *  0 points [-]

"families patriarch"......"sacrifice for the greater good of the family that she would be coerced into making"

Is it not clear I am talking about group level dynamics?

"I'm also not sure that "short-term" and "long-term" are a good way of classifying things into near and far. For instance, ideals about improving and ennobling yourself in school are "far" and part of what motivates one to go to school, and this is a long-term objective. But the actual task of going to school in the present and actually attending the lectures and doing the exercises is "near". (And effectively studying is difficult because the near and far modes don't necessarily pull in the same direction.)"

umm yes that is what this is all predicated on.... and I am saying "coercion may be one of the mechanisms that have enabled humans to engage and execute long term plans."

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 20 May 2011 11:42:37AM 1 point [-]

"families patriarch"......"sacrifice for the greater good of the family that she would be coerced into making"

Is it not clear I am talking about group level dynamics?

It's not obvious. Certainly that's one possible interpretation, but the "I thought" structure of the post muddles this.

You started off with the sentence "I was in the subway about a month ago when saw an advert for a new show The Bourgeoisie". Obviously, the fact that you had this thought a month ago in a subway is not relevant for the rest of the post - it's just background on what started this train of thought. However, it was not clear that the forced marriage bit was not likewise just background on what led you to the next thought.

Instead, it looked like the post was just a string of separate thoughts, with no clear way of telling which ones happened to belong together and which ones were just there by accident.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit