Peterdjones comments on Rationality Quotes: June 2011 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 01 June 2011 08:17AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (470)

Tags: quotes

Comments (470)

Sort By: Best

Show:

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

Comment author: Peterdjones 13 June 2011 08:51:44PM 1 point [-]

I'm not telling you to believe me, I'm just pointing out that you should believe me, because I'm right.

There;s no appreciable difference between "telling me to do X" and "pointing out I should do X".

Do you not believe in consequentialism? I could provide some arguments for it.

What I mainly believe in is the necessity or arguing for claims. But we seem to have made a little progress there.

Comment author: Alicorn 14 June 2011 12:12:58AM 1 point [-]

There;s no appreciable difference between "telling me to do X" and "pointing out I should do X".

There is some. The former adds an implicit authority claim, whereas the latter could be said in language that does not imply one.

Comment author: Will_Sawin comment score below threshold [+] (134 children)

Comment author: ata 13 June 2011 11:08:42PM * 4 points [-]

Is there any point to arguing at the meta level like this? Why not just give your arguments instead of arguing that arguments exist?

Comment author: Will_Sawin comment score below threshold [+] (132 children)

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 13 June 2011 11:53:51PM 1 point [-]

It is too short.

Comment author: Will_Sawin 14 June 2011 12:06:29AM -2 points [-]

I had thought that people on lesswrong would be aware of the actual arguments.

Comment author: Alicorn 14 June 2011 12:14:25AM 5 points [-]

Please describe the hypothetical person who would be helped at all, or convinced of any proposition, by being invited to reflect on arguments for and against consequentialism of which they were already aware.

Comment author: Will_Sawin 14 June 2011 12:30:54AM 0 points [-]

Peterdjones, who says that:

Do you not believe in consequentialism? I could provide some arguments for it.

What I mainly believe in is the necessity or arguing for claims

I interpreted this to mean that he believed in consequentialism but did not feel I had sufficiently argued that non-consequentialism is evidence of irrationality. That is, that he was aware of arguments for consequentialism but was choosing not to apply them to the issue.

Maybe this interpretation was wrong, but it was not obviously wrong.

Comment author: Peterdjones 21 June 2011 01:23:52PM 0 points [-]

I don't particularly believe in consequentialism.

I wouldn't say that someone "is" irrational because they fail to argue one particular point.

It is just that energy spent asserting that certain ideas are or are no rational would be better spent putting forward arguments. Rationality is something you do.

Comment author: Will_Sawin 21 June 2011 02:43:36PM -1 points [-]

I don't particularly believe in consequentialism.

Then either you can be dutch-booked or you can fail to dutch-book others.

I wouldn't say that someone "is" irrational because they fail to argue one particular point.

You parsed my sentence wrong.

It is just that energy spent asserting that certain ideas are or are no rational would be better spent putting forward arguments. Rationality is something you do.

There are certain arguments which people on lesswrong are expected to know. Maybe the arguments for consequentialism are not among them?

I would recount them for you, but I don't really think that will do any good.

continue this thread »

Peterdjones comments on Rationality Quotes: June 2011 - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (470)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (470)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login