= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on [SEQ RERUN] The Amazing Virgin Pregnancy - 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 (27)
What exactly is this supposed to be teaching us? It seems like it's just making fun of Christians.
I learned a lot from the comments. Mockery of Mormonism is widely agreed to be hilarious because it is "obviously" absurd. For example, it is "obvious" that Joseph Smith is a con artist. When a similar treatment is aimed at mainstream Christianity, exposing the "obvious" lies, it seems tacky and offensive because these lies are widely believed.
That said, I can't tell if the original post was designed to troll people who would be offended by its style, or designed to amuse people who already agree with its message.
Eliezer said in the comments that the intent was to show how absurd religious beliefs would seem to someone who is a true outsider, and that even many atheists take Christian beliefs seriously (or at least don't see them as strange).
I'm not sure of the extent to which he succeeded, of course, but he's fairly upfront about the intended lesson.
But everything seems absurd to an outsider. Eliezer believes he can create God with a computer program, for example. Something being absurd doesn't make it false.
See also absurdity bias and Yvain's "Talking Snakes: A Cautionary Tale".
Which is to say: you're right. I have updated in the direction of "this post was useless."
Also Raising the Sanity Waterline
Some things should sound absurd (because they aren't true), and some shouldn't. Absurdity bias is where this judgment fails, but if you see absurdly wrong things as non-absurd, that would be the opposite, non-absurdity bias, also a problem.
So, I agree with your main point, but at the risk of being pedantic: absurdity bias is the tendency of a system to judge absurd-sounding statements as false.
Judging as false an absurd statement that turns out to also be false might not be a case where "the judgment fails," but it's just as good an example of absurdity bias as judging as false an absurd statement that turns out to be true.