GabrielDuquette comments on Rhetoric for the Good - Less Wrong

49 Post author: lukeprog 26 October 2011 06:52PM

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

Comments (289)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 25 October 2011 05:55:25PM 0 points [-]

Do you honestly believe that an average person is ever going to do any of that, in the way you just described, without being raised from birth in a world precisely tailored to make it easier for them to do so?

Comment author: Logos01 25 October 2011 06:10:24PM 0 points [-]

... Defining a few terms:

  • "ever": within the projected remaining longevity of anyone currently alive.

  • "average person": A sufficient portion of people who are no more than 1 standard deviation away from the mode of any given manner of behavior as to be representative of the whole.

-- that being said: no, no I do not.


A different set of definitions:

  • "ever": throughout the remainder of history

  • "an average person": at least one person who is validly described as 'average' at the time it happens

-- Yes, yes I do.


Even explaining that took more nuance than you'd like, I suspect. Please note how radically different the two statements are, even though they both conform very closely to what you said. THIS is why nuance is sometimes indispensable.

Comment author: [deleted] 25 October 2011 06:22:41PM *  0 points [-]

Within our lifetimes, conversational speech will not resemble a legal document. Nor is the average person persuaded by legalese. In fact, they're turned off by it. Nuance is sometimes indispensable, but taking such a macroscopic view of nuance that "average" people from the year 2345 are included is stretching credulity, to say the least (not that I haven't been guilty of the same crime).

Comment author: Logos01 25 October 2011 06:30:30PM 1 point [-]

Within our lifetimes, conversational speech will not resemble a legal document.

Not all conversations, no -- but if an average person is unprepared for legalese then he'd better always have a lawyer with him when he signs anything, ever. This has an unhappy context for our conversatoin: is there a rationality-equivalent of a lawyer?

Comment author: Jack 25 October 2011 06:44:53PM 3 points [-]
Comment author: pedanterrific 25 October 2011 07:22:12PM 1 point [-]

The Order of Silent Confessors, maybe?

Comment author: [deleted] 25 October 2011 06:32:22PM 0 points [-]

Good question. Perhaps there's a market for that.

Comment author: Logos01 25 October 2011 06:37:18PM 1 point [-]

It is by my will alone that I set my mind in motion.

Comment author: [deleted] 25 October 2011 06:41:40PM 0 points [-]

It is a really good idea, though. Has it been brought up before on LW? Like the boot camp, but longer, and more in depth, and accredited somehow?