Larks comments on Rationality and Relationships September 2011 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (101)
I think this is a very bad idea, considering the record of past discussions about sex, gender, and related matters on LW. I've seen quite a few of those, and almost inevitably, the result is either an awful death spiral or, in case someone tries injecting a serious dose of reality, quarrels and internet drama. If the recent discussions superficially look better than usual, this is only because nobody has bothered much with trying to steer them closer to reality, and the death spirals have been able to drift away happily and undisturbedly.
For whatever reason, this forum has shown to be incapable of conducting rational discussions about these topics. This is a sad verdict, but I'm afraid it's realistic.
I don't understand why this comment doesn't have more upvotes.
It seems, on relationships at least, that LW resorts to a sort of phoney rationalism, where theory does a lot of the work, with very little recourse to evidence. Has anyone here ever linked to studies on the effects if marriage on happiness, productivity, etc.?
I don't want to link inside LW, so here's an example from outside of what I'm talking about; the apparant attempt to combine generalising from one example with deduction from first principles, and from this find a theory of relationships.
This is a shame, because I do think rationality has enourmously benefitted my current relationship. I just don't think LW usefully discusses such things.
I think so, yes. I can't offhand recall where...
You're pointing to Curi as an example of LW thought?!
No, I'm pointing to an article by William Godwin, which Curi quoted, as an it is an example of the mistake LWers make.