= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
lessdazed comments on Well-Kept Gardens Die By Pacifism - 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 (307)
All else equal, one infers values from actions.
When multiple parties make a pact to modify their actions from what they would otherwise have done, it is a mistake to think that they have necessarily modified their values. In particular, if they agree to modify their actions to be similar to each other's, to each perform the actions that best jointly satisfy their values, it is a mistake to think that any individual or all of them now has the value set that would be implied by an individual independently choosing to act as each has agreed.
Criticizing for doing a type of thing is misguided. "Slavery!"
Concerns about politeness, manners, and social norms that underlie clear communication are tied into real-world impact. You seem to be artificially constructing criticism by looking for types of things and labeling them with the term that describes them and connotes they are evil without making concrete criticisms of things actually said or done here (I didn't see "politeness" or "manners" invoked in this comment thread, for example).
Often, it depends. ;)
It is legitimate to have preferences (or ethics or morals) that do deprecate all instances of doing a type of thing.
Worse, what I said was logically self-contradictory.
Let's try again:
For almost any type of thing, it is not true that it is always deleterious.
Criticizing a type of thing is useful to the extent you and others are poor at reasoning about and acting on specifics.
Good point.
That works!