cousin_it comments on The noncentral fallacy - the worst argument in the world? - Less Wrong

157 Post author: Yvain 27 August 2012 03:36AM

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

Comments (1742)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 August 2012 07:12:01PM 18 points [-]

It may be a word error - I don't think it is, "Evolutionary psychology is riddled with false claims produced by sexist male scientists and rationalized by the scientists even though the claims are not at all well-supported compared to nonsexist alternatives" is a coherent and meaningful description of a way the universe could be but isn't, and is therefore false, not a word error - but if so, it's a word-error made by stereotypically left-wing people like Lewontin and Gould who were explicitly political in their criticism, not a word-error made by any right-wing scientists I can think of offhand.

In general, we should be careful about dismissing claims as meaningless or incoherent, when often only a very reasonable and realistic amount of charity is required to reinterpret the claim as meaningful and false - most people are trying to be meaningful most of the time, even when they're rationalizing a wrong position. Only people who've gotten in a lot more trouble than that are actively trying to avoid letting their arguments be meaningful. And meaningless claims can be dismissed immediately, without bringing forth evidence or counterobservations; meaningful false claims require more demonstration to show they're false. So when somebody brings a false claim, and you dismiss it as meaningless, you're actually being significantly logically rude to them - putting in less effort than they're investing - it takes more effort to bring forth a meaningful false claim than to call something 'meaningless'.

Comment author: cousin_it 27 August 2012 07:30:29PM *  15 points [-]

I dislike accusations of sexism as much as the next guy, but in the last year or two I have started to think that ev-psych is way overconfident. The coarse grained explanation is that ev-psych seems to be "softer" than regular psychology, which itself is "softer" than medicine, and we all know what percentage of medical findings are wrong. I'd be curious to learn what other LWers think about this, especially you, because your writings got me interested in ev-psych in the first place.

Comment author: MichaelHoward 27 August 2012 09:17:21PM 3 points [-]

I have started to think that ev-psych is way overconfident.

As in about the likelihood of certain kinds of explanations?

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 28 August 2012 03:49:47AM 2 points [-]

Can't think anything without a concrete example.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 28 August 2012 11:24:23AM 3 points [-]

I am going to rehearse saying this in a robotic voice, while spinning round and round flailing my arms in a mechanical fashion.

Comment author: moocow1452 28 August 2012 01:41:19PM 3 points [-]

Can you put it up on Youtube when you're done?

Comment author: J_Taylor 28 August 2012 10:38:28PM 2 points [-]
Comment author: NancyLebovitz 30 August 2012 02:23:06PM 5 points [-]

So far as I know, the association of pink with girls and blue with boys is a western custom which only goes back a century or so.

Comment author: J_Taylor 30 August 2012 11:18:08PM 3 points [-]

Precisely.

Comment author: novalis 27 August 2012 10:07:40PM 1 point [-]

This seems like a qualitative argument, when a quantitative argument would be more interesting. Who is the John Ioannidis of evolutionary psychology? Or, what research has been published that has later turned out to be false?

(Also, why do you dislike accusations of sexism? Shouldn't you only dislike false accusations of sexism?)

Comment author: Decius 29 August 2012 12:31:57AM 1 point [-]

I dislike accusations of sexism for the same reason I dislike accusations of any other negative behavior. Those accusations signal either sexism or false accusations of sexism, both of which are net negatives to me.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 30 August 2012 03:27:12AM -1 points [-]

(Also, why do you dislike accusations of sexism? Shouldn't you only dislike false accusations of sexism?)

See the OP.

Comment author: novalis 01 September 2012 04:02:30AM -1 points [-]

Because you and I no doubt hang out in completely different circles, my view of the prototypical case of sexism is probably different from yours. Also, I consider most non-prototypical cases of sexism to be wrong, so there aren't really any connotations being smuggled in.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 September 2012 01:35:35AM 0 points [-]

Also, I consider most non-prototypical cases of sexism to be wrong,

I may or may not agree depending on which definition of "sexism" you are using.

so there aren't really any connotations being smuggled in.

Well, in any debate you'd still have to explain why that particular example of sexism is wrong.

Comment author: novalis 02 September 2012 03:03:18AM 0 points [-]

Well, in any debate you'd still have to explain why that particular example of sexism is wrong.

Not if (a) you're in a situation where everyone already agrees on that or (b) you consider fairness to be an important value.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 03 September 2012 02:03:27AM 0 points [-]

Not if (a) you're in a situation where everyone already agrees on that

And assuming you also don't want to even consider the possibility that you might be wrong. In any case, as you may have noticed, that's not true here.

(b) you consider fairness to be an important value.

More like you consider a particular interpretation of fairness to be such an important value that it trumps all others.

Comment author: novalis 03 September 2012 02:39:29AM 0 points [-]

Not if (a) you're in a situation where everyone already agrees on that

And assuming you also don't want to even consider the possibility that you might be wrong. In any case, as you > may have noticed, that's not true here.

Having common language and beliefs does not preclude questioning those beliefs.

(b) you consider fairness to be an important value.

More like you consider a particular interpretation of fairness to be such an important value that it trumps all others.

Can you unpack that?

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 03 September 2012 10:19:35PM 0 points [-]

Ok, I suppose I should ask you what your definition of sexism is.

Also, is e.g., affirmative action sexist, how about not using affirmative action? Same question about desperate impact?