= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ryjm comments on In Defense of Ayn Rand - 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 (35)
I'm sincerely confused as to why this is getting downvoted so heavily (and it seems to have disappeared... is this a feature?). Is it just the nature of the topic? Honestly, it's not a well structured critique or whatever, but this is the discussion page, is it not? I'm not arguing some logically indefensible position, and I can't seem to find any errors in my logic (my logic consisting of my use of Rand's philosophy and not of the logical positioning of her ideas).
Is it not encouraging valid discussion? I don't see why not, as there are many things to talk about here. Perhaps a response to the idea of a closed system? I thought that was interesting. Maybe a defense of why it is okay to disregard facts in favor of convincing rhetoric? I honestly think I may be missing something in Eleizer's post, because it seems to me to hold a blatant disregard for evidence.
Did I need to make it more clear that I am not arguing for or against objectivism, only for a more charitable rhetorical representation of a cultural and philosophical character? Maybe someone can enlighten me on the atrocities committed by Rand.
Have these things been said before? Maybe someone can link me to the relevant discussion.
Is this "mind killing"? I would like to know which parts, and why.
Re-reading (skimming) "Guardians of Ayn Rand", the "closed system" point seems to me central and not addressed as such in your post.
Articles with a certain number of downvotes (4? 5?) disappear automatically from the list of posts, regardless of content. I wish this number of downvotes were set higher, say to 10 or 15. The only thing I want to go away fast are spam posts and truly horrendous articles; things that are overall disapproved by the community to the point of just 5-10 downvotes, like this article, can still spark interesting discussions I don't want to miss.
You can adjust your personal settings. I have mine set to never disappear things.
Me too.
The defaults were set ridiculously low, and I dislike the thought that a handful of ideologically motivated people could effectively Memory Hole topics and opinions they disliked.
This is yet another opportunity for me to opine about the pitiful state of collaborative filtering on web site software. It was about a zillion times better 20 years ago with mailing list software and Usenet.
What did they have that worked better?
Usenet killfiles allowed an elaborate scoring system.
The Extropian mailing list, which I'm sure has a few refugees here, was a mix of collaborative filtering and user scoring. I didn't use it extensively, but it was there.
Thank you! I didn't know that.