= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MichaelHoward comments on Toxic Truth - 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 (25)
The point was to communicate on a gut-level the first sentence of the post, but here it is in a different way:
When they're given treacherously or used recklessly, truth is as toxic as hydroxilic acid.
I got that.
My point was that if truth is toxic to you, then you have some underlying problems. Truth doesn't have to be toxic.
I strongly disagree. You don't have to have underlying problems to be misled (or, for that matter, harmed by others being misled) by malevolently or carelessly cherry-picked evidence.
No-one said it did.
Well, the example given was just one side of the story (the costs) but not the benefits. If you're thinking right in this case you shouldn't be misled, you should just ask "Then why is it so freakin' common?"
In a less convenient example, if someone tells you about a few studies that support conclusion x (cherry picked out of the larger body of studies that support !x) then that could be harmful if you trust the guy to be an unbiased selector, but in general you should be suspicious of how the studies were selected.
Sure, it's a bit too strong to say you can never be harmed at all if you are at least half sane, but if you're that worried about being misled by truth, you probably have some underlying problems to deal with.
And I didn't say anyone said it did.