Multiheaded comments on Glenn Beck discusses the Singularity, cites SI researchers - Less Wrong

50 Post author: Brihaspati 12 June 2012 04:45PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (181)

Tags: singularity

Comments (181)

Sort By: Best

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Multiheaded 13 June 2012 08:38:02PM * -1 points [-]

Then what the fuck is so good about official Mormon dogma, if people are forced to filter and compartmentalize a significant teaching of their God's own prophets just not to behave and think like bigoted scumbags?

I think that e.g. liberal secular humanism doesn't have any such glaring flaw - at least not for the average person (thorough/neurotic thinkers who obsess over the meaning of life not included - perhaps you indeed need something others would call fundamentalism, and perhaps, in a lesser way, do I).

A choice between "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone was nice, just because" and "Omega will give you heaps of utility, but it hates normal, socially affordable behaviors X, Y, Z" is very obvious for me.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 13 June 2012 08:43:07PM * 3 points [-]

Then what the fuck is so good about official Mormon dogma, if people are forced to filter and compartmentalize a significant teaching of their God's own prophets just not to behave and think like bigoted scumbags?

Provides Schelling points for socio-political coordination. You think the suffering of a few gays outweighs all the benefits of cooperation provided by Mormon institutions? Puh-lease.

/trolololol

Comment author: Multiheaded comment score below threshold [+] (16 children)

Comment author: Will_Newsome 13 June 2012 08:50:00PM 5 points [-]

Hm? I'm talking about already-existent benefits. Mormons are like the happiest, most fulfilled, most transhumanist-friendly people on the planet, and they're rapidly spreading those memes throughout the world. Maybe you have a deontological soft-spot for gays, or you have an egoistic preference for the wellbeing of gays. But from a right and proper utilitarian standpoint, Mormonism is a huge win.

/trolololol

Comment author: bradleyt 13 June 2012 08:52:48PM 4 points [-]

I am an ex-Mormon who attended BYU. Your description of Mormons is completely foreign to me.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 14 June 2012 12:28:50PM 5 points [-]

Your mutually contradictory anecdotes cancel each other out, but even a casual glance at the statistics seems to confirm Will's view that Mormon's are particularly functional members of society. Compared to non-Mormons, Mormon's are more likely to graduate from college, less likely to be diagnosed with alchoholism, less likely to commit a felony, less likely to get divorced, less likely to smoke, less likely to suffer from depression, etc...

Comment author: Will_Newsome 13 June 2012 08:55:54PM * 5 points [-]

Well, you would know. Personally I've met maybe a hundred Mormons and noticed a distinct tendency towards apparent overall happiness, social wellbeing, et cetera. FWIW most of the Mormons I know are from Tucson, and some of them look on the Utahans as being a somewhat separate tribe.

It's probably like zero information, but the only Mormon who I know went to BYU, also happened to be the surliest one.

(And obviously this is all modulo huge selection effects on who I've met. I don't exactly live a normal life.)

Comment author: bradleyt 13 June 2012 09:21:51PM 5 points [-]

Yeah, I'm most familiar with Utah/Idaho Mormons who tend to be on the more extreme spectrum. The problem is that these are the guys who hold the power in the Church.

Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Mormons give 10% of their income to the church. AFAIK, the vast majority goes into building and maintaining churches and large, extravagant temples, and a very small portion actually goes to real charitable work. If you could convince a Mormon to leave the church but still donate 10% of his income to a more effective charity, I think you'd end up doing a lot more good from a utilitarian perspective.

It's also pretty well-known that the state of Utah has an abnormally high rate of mental illness, and a lot of people suggest that Mormons often claim that they're a lot happier than they really are. I tend to agree: as a Mormon, you're taught all the time about how the Church is so great and how it's the best path to happiness, so you're naturally going to want to appear happy to other people.

My hunch is that Mormonism tends to make certain people a lot happier and other people more depressed. I definitely fell into the latter group--when I was Mormon I was constantly wracked with guilt because I--gasp--masturbated. At the same time, because I held the Mormon priesthood, I was essentially told that I had magical powers, and that I had more authority to act in God's name than the Pope. So I think for some people Mormonism is a big guilt trip, and for others it's a big power trip. Both are unhealthy.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 14 June 2012 04:28:15PM 5 points [-]

From a relatively outside view (my upbringing was semi-secular Jewish), belief in heaven and hell is really strong stuff for some proportion of people-- I'm not sure how high the proportion is, but people can make themselves acutely miserable from fear of hell and/or fear of not getting into heaven.

Comment author: bradleyt 14 June 2012 07:00:30PM 4 points [-]

To be fair to Mormons, they don't have the concept of an eternal hell like most Christian fundamentalists. There is something called "outer darkness", but you'd have to work really, really hard to get there--like, harder than Hitler.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 14 June 2012 04:42:37PM 2 points [-]

To be fair, some people can also make themselves acutely miserable from fear of not being asked to the prom. It's hard to overestimate people's ability to make ourselves acutely miserable; it's not entirely clear to me that the causes we attribute that misery to are at all causal to it.

Comment author: Multiheaded 13 June 2012 08:56:10PM * 0 points [-]

Maybe you have a deontological soft-spot for gays, or you have an egoistic preference for the wellbeing of gays.

Not for gays specifically, of course, just for all minorities who share the "born that way but can be broken into a different mold by torture+brainwashing" pattern. If Mormons tried those "shaming" tactics, etc on, say, opponents of transhumanism or borderline-autistic geeks, I'd speak out for those. Because I feel that, socially, manipulating people like that is a line that should not be crossed.

Well, of course I take it personally being bisexual myself, but still - I spoke out for gay rights even before I realized my own sexuality, just because it always looked like a glaring injustice to me.

Comment author: Emile 13 June 2012 09:24:24PM 4 points [-]

Not for gays specifically, of course, just for all minorities who share the "born that way but can be broken into a different mold by torture+brainwashing" pattern.

That description would cover psychopaths, alcoholics, people with anger management problems, etc. - and in their case, the brainwashing seems much more justified if it works. It might even justify the occasional "fixing" of someone that doesn't need to be fixed (though I don't know if that's the case for Mormonism).

Comment author: Multiheaded comment score below threshold [+] (0 children)

Comment author: Will_Newsome 13 June 2012 08:58:56PM 5 points [-]

Aren't you currently shaming Mormonism? Not tolerating intolerance isn't exactly self-defeating, but if you look at the antifa guys, you really start to wonder whether that's a path you want to go down.

Comment author: Multiheaded comment score below threshold [+] (0 children)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 14 June 2012 01:27:00AM 3 points [-]

Could you taboo what you mean by "torture+brainwashing".

Comment author: Multiheaded 14 June 2012 02:23:48AM 1 point [-]

See my other reply; it's aggressive influence by people in a position of emotional power - influence that has no justifiable social goal.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 14 June 2012 12:02:56PM * 4 points [-]

See my other reply; it's aggressive influence by people in a position of emotional power - influence that has no justifiable social goal.

So, by "torture+brainwashing", you mean persuasion? Your terminology is slightly confusing, to say the least.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 13 June 2012 08:52:15PM 2 points [-]

(Oh yeah, maybe I should disclose that I just met a very pretty, very sexist, very Confederate Mormon girl who happens to play a lot of Diablo 3. So uh, I'm feeling a little bit pro-Mormon as of a few days ago. :P )

Comment author: khafra 14 June 2012 01:58:07PM 0 points [-]

Should we also expect you to be

more pro-sexism and pro-confederacy because she's pretty
more pro-confederacy and pro-beauty because she's sexist
more pro-beauty and pro-sexism because she's confederate
more pro-sexism because she's confederate and pretty
more pro-confederacy because she's sexist and pretty, or
more pro-beauty because she's sexist and confederate?

Comment author: Will_Newsome 16 June 2012 02:26:09AM * 3 points [-]

That's hard to think about. You'd think the answer would be "yes" to all of them, modulo errors of double-counting, but I don't actually know.

Multiheaded comments on Glenn Beck discusses the Singularity, cites SI researchers - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (181)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (181)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login