Jack comments on A Fable of Science and Politics - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (93)
Politics, social intercourse, public relationships were the major factors in our mind's evolution. Look up "HarryPotterandtheMethodsofRationality".
The concept bundling in politics (sky color, taxes, etc). You see, the political views "evolved" more, than were invented, thought over, whatever. Sometimes mammals seem to evolve something that seems more usefull to insects, fishes, or birds. And sometimes it really is (more usefull). And nowdays we may try to test it experimentally (genetic engenearing). But before making actual experiments, it isn't all that bright to jump to conclusions. And even after we'll prove the point, it isn't wise to criticize evolution in just the same way as any other disigner job.
The way our cultures with their law systems work isn't all that logical - from our viewpoint. They have all kind of odd evolutionary artifacts from the past - and from all the past attempts to "evolve future". But these evolved sets of roules (quiddich with Snitch) - actually do work. And we don't have good enoug models (as yet) to test more logical sets of roules without actual risk of bludshed. Currently, western (greece-roman) culture may dye our (low birthrate) just "for" its "test run" of granting rights to woman and childreen.
Welcome to Less Wrong!
Your comment suggests you might have interesting ideas to share but unfortunately it isn't clear enough. There are quite a few spelling errors and instances of confusing syntax. Your use of parentheses and scare quotes also muddles your meaning.
If you intended to direct this comment at the author of the post, then I'm pretty sure he's already heard of Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. He wrote them :-)
That's golden. In fact I'd say that accidentally quoting your own work back to you as corroborating authority without even being aware that it is you has to beat imitation as a form of sincere flattery.
"accidentally quoting your own work back to you as corroborating authority without even being aware that it is you"
It isn't the Bible, or something... as yet. I didn't think it may be taken this way.
It is a work - the same way that a famous piece of literature or the finger painting of a child is a work. Scripture doesn't come into it.