= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
KPier comments on New Post version 1 (please read this ONLY if your last name beings with a–k) - 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 (86)
I would love to see a post on hacking yourself poly from a woman's perspective. To be honest, I'm a little frustrated with the extent to which all dating advice on LessWrong is aimed at those attracted to females. (Luke's post is great and well considered, though).
I have no need to hack myself poly, but I'm curious about what separates this kind of preference hacking from the kinds we tend to treat as taboo here.
You obviously wouldn't want to hack yourself to change your terminal preferences (Gandhi and the murder pill), but hacking yourself to change your behavior to help you maximize terminal preferences is fine.(Gandhi taking a pill that would allow him to go without sleep indefinitely, freeing up 6+ hours a day for peaceful protesting). Hacking other people is usually bad.
I can't think of an example of self-hacking to change behaviors being treated as taboo, but I'd be interested if you can think of one.
Hacking oneself to be polyamorous seems itself like preference rather than behavior hacking, which is why I'm confused. I would have to change what I want out of relationships to become uncomfortable with being in romantic relationships containing more than two people (my case is a bit more complicated than that, there are different types of polyamory, but the specifics aren't relevant to the main point.) Similarly, I find it doubtful that a person hard wired for monogamy (and some people seem to be intensely monogamous by nature,) could be hacked into polyamory without altering their values with regards to relationships.
I'm actually staggered by the amount of so-called "dating advice" on LW in the first place.
Hey, I'm attracted to females. Females are pretty. But yes, I am also one.
Well, you'd know better than me if your post would be redundant. (And I wasn't trying to make assumptions, sorry). But if you can write it in a way that doesn't assume your audience is universally attracted to women, that's what I'd appreciate.
I'm not criticizing Luke's post, to make that clear; the rationality takeaways are very well universalized and the topic material is highly personal so he couldn't really have written it differently.