Peterdjones comments on Morality is Awesome - Less Wrong

86 [deleted] 06 January 2013 03:21PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (437)

Comments (437)

Sort By: Best

Show:

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

Comment author: Peterdjones 08 January 2013 12:00:54PM * -2 points [-]

Not really differrent. If you pander to someone by presenting dumbed-down ideas as profound, they are liable to like them and judge them to be useful. People judge junk food to be worth eating, after all.

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 12:13:25PM 0 points [-]

they are liable to like them and judge them to be useful. People judge junk food to be worth eating, after all.

Are you arguing that judgments of usefulness have, in this case, (and others?) been distorted by the halo effect? Or have I misunderstood this comment?

Comment author: Peterdjones comment score below threshold [+] (9 children)

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 01:32:58PM 0 points [-]

Could you taboo "dumbed-down"? Because it appears I have no idea what you're talking about (or you could be talking gibberish, I suppose.)

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 01:39:22PM * 1 point [-]

Alright, who's downvoting all comments in this conversation? If you have some objection to this line of discussion, come out and say it; don't karmassassinate people.

EDIT: Ok, I may have misused "karmassassinate" there. I'm not sure. it's annoying and unhelpful, whatever you call it.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 08 January 2013 02:49:20PM 2 points [-]

I reject the idea that there's something wrong with silent downvotes. (And "karmassassination" typically refers to downvoting a large chunk of a particular user's posts without reference to their content, not to silent downvoting, nor to downvoting an entire conversational branch based on the branch's content.)

Comment author: Peterdjones 08 January 2013 01:42:08PM 1 point [-]

eg "Metathics isn't complicated, it just awesomeness". However "Metaethics is complicated, but you can get an initial toehold on it by considering awesomeness" is OK. That;s just introductory.

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 01:53:07PM -1 points [-]

I'm aware that you think this is an example. Could you tell me what you mean?

Comment author: Peterdjones 08 January 2013 01:57:35PM 0 points [-]

Presenting something that is simplistic (too simple, lossy) as if it were adequate, or even superior to standard versions.

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 02:05:04PM -1 points [-]

I see. And you claim that overexposure to such material has rendered the average LW member unable to detect oversimplification?

Comment author: Peterdjones 08 January 2013 02:10:56PM 0 points [-]

Thats my explanation for the upvoting that puzzled the articles' author.

Comment author: MugaSofer 08 January 2013 02:20:14PM -1 points [-]

Thank you for clarifying.

Peterdjones comments on Morality is Awesome - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (437)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (437)

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