Ezekiel comments on 2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey - Less Wrong

65 Post author: Yvain 03 November 2012 11:00PM

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

Comments (733)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Ezekiel 04 November 2012 12:03:58AM 36 points [-]

Two questions, as I take the survey:

  1. What does "spiritual" mean, in the context of "Atheist [but | and not] spiritual"?
  2. I genuinely have no idea whether I'd prefer low or high redistribution of wealth. What do I tick for my political opinion?
Comment author: arborealhominid 05 November 2012 01:10:54AM 4 points [-]

I had both of these questions as well. I've always been confused about the word "spiritual," as some people seem to use it to mean "having feelings of awe or reverence that are cognitively similar to those expressed in religious worship" while others use it to mean "actually believing in spirits." I consider myself spiritual by the first definition, but not the second. On the survey, I described myself as "atheist but spiritual," but now I'm not sure this was the most accurate description, since it falsely implies that I believe in the supernatural.

As far as redistribution of wealth goes, I don't know what you should mark. I chose "Libertarian" because I am rather distrustful of centralized government, and redistribution of wealth generally depends on some sort of centralization. But I know very little about what sort of consequences redistribution of wealth would actually have, so my views on the subject are quite tentative. (I recall hearing somewhere that the Scandinavian countries scored highest on a survey of self-reported happiness, which would suggest that redistribution of wealth at least doesn't prevent a society from being largely happy. If anyone can confirm or deny this, I would much appreciate it.)

Comment author: RobinZ 04 November 2012 12:16:46AM 4 points [-]

According to this Google result, "spiritual" in this context seems to allude to a kind of private, iconoclastic, mystical religion, as opposed to public, creedal, classical religions like most sects of Christianity. I hope that helps.

Comment author: [deleted] 05 November 2012 03:34:39AM *  1 point [-]

I took "spiritual" to mean in this context that you don't believe in ontologically basic mental entities, but still embrace feelings of wonder, majesty, euphoria, etc. typically associated with religions when contemplating/experiencing the natural world.

Do you not have a preference for low/high redistribution of wealth because you haven't studied enough economics, or because you have studied economics and haven't found a satisfying answer? (Alternatively, trying to answer this one question might just not be worth your time. If that's the case, I'd leave it blank. Or if you're otherwise choosing between two positions, flip a coin)

Comment author: Ezekiel 05 November 2012 12:07:58PM 2 points [-]

I took "spiritual" to mean in this context that you don't believe in ontologically basic mental entities, but still embrace feelings of wonder, majesty, euphoria, etc. typically associated with religions when contemplating/experiencing the natural world.

Notice that other people answering my question had different interpretations. I left it blank.

Do you not have a preference for low/high redistribution of wealth because you haven't studied enough economics, or because you have studied economics and haven't found a satisfying answer?

Because I haven't studied economics beyond the Wikipedia level, and systems with large numbers of humans involved are really, really complicated. Why so many democratic citizens feel qualified to intuit their way to an opinion is beyond me.

Comment author: [deleted] 05 November 2012 02:02:38PM 0 points [-]

Why so many democratic citizens feel qualified to intuit their way to an opinion is beyond me.

Systematic human irrationality?

Because I haven't studied economics beyond the Wikipedia level, and systems with large numbers of humans involved are really, really complicated.

If learning about economics is something worthwhile for you, then I recommend picking up a good macroeconomics textbook and working through it. A good 101 textbook will outline simple but useful models that can help us understand the economy. (This is like how statistical mechanics can help us understand thermodynamic systems without knowing information about each individual particle.)

Alternatively, there should be open online courses from MIT, Harvard, etc. if that is more your style.

Comment author: Jakeness 04 November 2012 06:06:58AM 1 point [-]

For 1, I took it as meaning having a belief in some form of soul, afterlife, or karma.

Comment author: adamisom 04 November 2012 09:37:28AM 2 points [-]

But I absolutely believe in karma. I guess that makes me spiritual. The things you find out about yourself eh?

Comment author: [deleted] 04 November 2012 07:20:25PM 1 point [-]

even if you interpret karma as reddit/lw karma, or social consequences, "absolutely" is too much.

don't bet your house on it.

Comment author: adamisom 05 November 2012 12:56:00AM 2 points [-]

I mean LW karma (plus I'm a Redditor too) -

from my study of human societies, I believe my remark is called a "joke" - though I admit some people are bad at making jokes :p

Comment author: Giles 04 November 2012 05:28:01AM 1 point [-]

For 2. - you could fill out the political compass survey (it comes up later in the survey under "unreasonably long and complicated questions"). Alternatively you could pick the political labels that you think might apply to you and then choose one at random.

Comment author: faul_sname 05 November 2012 01:47:19AM -1 points [-]

That one didn't seem to have slanted questions at all. (e.g. "It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.").

Comment author: [deleted] 04 November 2012 03:41:39PM 0 points [-]

What does "spiritual" mean, in the context of "Atheist [but | and not] spiritual"?

I'd say, having the alief that, as IIRC someone on LW put it (I can't recall the exact wording and the search engine doesn't seem to help me), you are a timeless optimization process of which your current incarnation is a mere approximation.

Comment author: [deleted] 04 November 2012 07:19:07PM 3 points [-]

That's not spiritual.