wedrifid comments on Notes on Brainwashing & 'Cults' - Less Wrong

35 Post author: gwern 13 September 2013 08:49PM

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

Comments (101)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 18 September 2013 06:44:59AM 0 points [-]

Sorry, exactly what is it that you're outraged about?

As a general policy:

  • All cases where non-sequitur but technically true claims are made where the actual implied rhetorical meaning is fallacious. Human social instincts are such that most otherwise intelligent humans seem to be particularly vulnerable to this form of persuasion.
  • All arguments or insinuations of the form "Hitler, Osama Bin Laden and/or cultists do <something superficially similar to X>. Therefore, if you say that <X> is ok then you are Bad."
  • Additional outrage, disdain or contempt applies when:
    • The non-sequitur's are, through either high social skill or (as in this case) plain luck, well calibrated to persuade the audience despite being bullshit.
    • Actual negative consequences can be expected to result from the epistemic damage perpetrated.
Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 20 September 2013 11:38:45AM *  5 points [-]

Thanks, that sounds reasonable. I didn't interpret Eugene's comments as being guilty of any of those, though.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 19 September 2013 07:28:43AM -1 points [-]

All cases where non-sequitur but technically true claims are made where the actual implied rhetorical meaning is fallacious. Human social instincts are such that most otherwise intelligent humans seem to be particularly vulnerable to this form of persuasion.

In my experience nearly all accusations that someone is being "emotionally abusive" are of this type.

Comment author: wedrifid 19 September 2013 10:52:03AM *  2 points [-]

In my experience nearly all accusations that someone is being "emotionally abusive" are of this type.

If that is true then you are fortunate to have lived such a sheltered existence. If it is not true (and to some extent even if it is) then I expect being exposed to this kind of denial and accusation of dishonesty to be rather damaging to those who are actual victims of the phenonemon you claim is 'nearly all' fallacious accusation.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 19 September 2013 08:31:58PM -1 points [-]

If that is true then you are fortunate to have lived such a sheltered existence.

I could say the same thing about you if you've never encountered people willing to make false accusations of abuse (frequently on behalf of children) with the force of the law, or at least child services behind them.

If it is not true (and to some extent even if it is) then I expect being exposed to this kind of denial and accusation of dishonesty to be rather damaging to those who are actual victims of the phenonemon you claim is 'nearly all' fallacious accusation.

This is as good a summery of the "how dare you urge restraint" position as any I've heard.