= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Hans comments on Why Support the Underdog? - 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 read your comment and I immediately wanted to vote up Marshall's original comment. After all, he's the underdog being criticized and chased away by the founder and administrator of this blog.
In the end, I didn't, probably for equally irrational reasons.
(Blinks.)
I have to say, that frame on the whole problem had never occurred to me. No wonder online communities have such a hard time developing membranes.
It's worse here, because for some reason when people like Marshall claim that "rationalist" means "treats any old crap like it was a worthy contribution", people here are sufficiently wary of confirmation bias to take it more seriously than it deserves.
Yeah, I've noticed. If I were to make a list of the top 3 rationalist errors, they'd be overconfidence, overcomplication, and underconfidence.
Either that or there's some kind of ancient echo of protecting the underdog in effort to keep the tribal power balance.