loqi comments on Rationality: Common Interest of Many Causes - Less Wrong

39 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 March 2009 10:49AM

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

Comments (39)

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

Comment author: loqi 30 March 2009 08:18:07PM 5 points [-]

Sounds like a sucker's game to me and I doubt I have any responsibility for your connotations [...] I have no idea where you connotations are - so you have all the cards.

This isn't an adversarial game. How do you know I will disagree with you? Even if you did know, why avoid it?

In a sense you are butting in on another conversation - where connotations are linked and have grown in context.. My use of the word choose is related to infotropism's descripiton of a hobo.

You uttered a statement of the form "Believe me - <tautology>" in direct reply to a comment I found fairly insightful. Infotropism laid out the connotation of his use of the word "choose" quite well, IMO, and your statement seems at odds with that.

When you are in the middle of an orgasium, come out of it, you want in again - Big Time.

If you define "choice" to cover this scenario in the context of a "who is worth helping" discussion, I question the value of the definition.

Connotations on the word "choice" are many, dialectical and necessarily VAGUE.

When that is the case for a word, you cannot use it to make a clear point without a supporting explanation. I'm assuming you didn't intend to make a vague point.

Comment deleted 31 March 2009 04:41:26PM *  [-]
Comment author: loqi 31 March 2009 06:53:28PM 1 point [-]

I found the above comment to be mostly incoherent, so I'll reply to the meaningful parts.

I have not at any point participated in the discussion "who is worth helping".

Infotropism made a comment that essentially said people are more likely to help "cute puppies" than "dirty hobos" due to buggy hardware. You replied that your dog's senses are probably sharper than a hobo's, and that the hobo chose his or her condition. I deem that "participation", even if you didn't understand what was being discussed or implied.

My answer to that is too radical for your ears.

How very condescending. Spare me your posturing.

Comment deleted 31 March 2009 08:08:48PM [-]
Comment author: loqi 31 March 2009 08:30:04PM 5 points [-]

why you think you have the right to deconstruct or correct another's expression

I think I have that right because I do have that right.