gwern comments on Open Thread, August 16-31, 2012 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: OpenThreadGuy 15 August 2012 03:25AM

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

Comments (313)

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

Comment author: prase 17 August 2012 11:19:04PM 2 points [-]

That is a great signalling response, but honest? You really don't know whether your friend is black or white?

Comment author: gwern 18 August 2012 02:48:09AM 2 points [-]

Well, as we all know, race is a purely social construct with no underlying biological basis; unfortunately, LWers are known for their very poor socializing skills and understanding of social norms. So shminux, a LWer, doesn't know?

Not very surprising, actually!

Comment author: siodine 19 August 2012 09:33:55PM *  0 points [-]

Well, as we all know, race is a purely social construct with no underlying biological basis

I know race is a social construct, but no underlying biological basis? Isn't this Lewontin's fallacy?

Comment author: gwern 19 August 2012 10:04:06PM *  1 point [-]

No, as I understand it, Lewontin's fallacy is considered to be not the claim that there is no underlying basis, but that this is established by looking at raw percentages of between-group vs within-group variation.

Comment author: prase 19 August 2012 08:39:46PM 0 points [-]

Although I assume you aren't being serious, remember that shminux claimed that he doesn't notice hair, eye and skin colour. As far as I know, colour is not a purely social construct, althout if shminux were a continental philosopher, I could imagine him believing that it is.

Comment author: gwern 19 August 2012 08:48:15PM 3 points [-]

C'mon, color is totally a social construct!

Comment author: Nornagest 19 August 2012 09:52:53PM 5 points [-]

There really should be a phrase for socially constructed divisions or elaborations of a continuous empirical space.

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 19 August 2012 10:48:06PM 2 points [-]

"self-fulfilling distinctions"?