= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Privileging the Question - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (311)
If I believed that a social norm encouraging homosexuality stood a significant chance of reducing the rate of heterosexual relationships to the point where the birthrate became low enough to cause collective harm, I would be concerned about public acceptance of homosexuality.
If I believed that a social norm encouraging non-voting stood a significant chance of reducing the voting rate to the point where it became low enough to cause harm, I would be concerned about public acceptance of non-voting.
I find the second claim significantly more plausible than the first, though given how implausible I find the first claim that isn't saying much.
Okay, but me saying "I don't think voting is valuable" on LW seems pretty unlikely to actually encourage such a social norm.
I would agree that it doesn't apply very much pressure, but what pressure it applies does seem pretty clearly to push in the direction of non-voting.
Yes, which frees up people's time to do and think about other things, and I think for LW people in particular that the benefits of this outweigh the costs of not voting (although I am amenable to a Fermi estimate suggesting otherwise).
I'm assuming your reasoning is that LW people are, or at least are capable of, spending their time/effort doing more valuable things, so time spent voting (including time spent becoming an informed voter) is a net loss.
If that assumption gets widely implemeted, the end result seems to be that only people who don't do anything particularly valuable with their time vote.
Am I following your reasoning correctly? Or is there some other aspect of LW people (like being more likely to work on x-risk, or being more likely to be mathematicians, or something else) driving your reasoning?
Yes.
This is nearly identical to the current situation as far as I can tell anyway.