= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Konkvistador comments on RationalWiki's take on LW - 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 (43)
I've browsed through a bunch of topics on RationalWiki, and it looks like a heavily ideological website. Thus, it tends to be extremely unreliable and biased on any topic that has even the slightest whiff of controversy. Anyone who makes a genuine effort to form an accurate view of the world will surely come to have at least some beliefs that will be met with scorn and sneering by the sort of people who write on RW.
Well, that's one I haven't heard before. What precise examples were you thinking of?
Example.
Rational Wiki is pretty blatantly ideological in both assumptions and spin.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/George_Bush
Another example both of blatant bias and why I stopped reading liberal blogs even when I felt entirely on their side. Such a complete refusal to offer respect to your opponents is epistemically rude and super annoying for me to read.