= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on Do Humans Want Things? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (52)
How would you (descriptively, "from the outside") explain the fact that you didn't provide information that would resolve my confusion (that you provided now), and instead pointed out that the reason for your actions lies in a tradition (conventional usage), and that I should engage that tradition directly? It seems like you were moved by considerations of assignment of blame (or responsibility), specifically you directed my attention to the process responsible for the problem. (I don't expect you thought of this so explicitly, but still something caused your response to go the way it went.)
I don't think blame works the way you seem to.
Blame is condemnation useful in shaping the future. It's not latent in who had the best opportunity to avoid a problem, or the last clear chance to avoid a problem, or who began a problem, etc.
Responsibility is something political beings invent to relate agents to causation.
When people talk about causation they're not necessarily playing that game.
Hmmm. I'm sorry you took it that way. I'm starting to get the sense that perhaps you see more connotations of normativity and judgment in general, and I try to see the world through the lens of a descriptivist project by default except for those rare occasions when I'm going to take a dangerous leap into the confusing lands of normativity.
I didn't know which information would resolve your confusion until after I stumbled upon it. The point about common usage merely meant to explain why I'm using the terms the way I am.