blacktrance comments on 2013 Census/Survey: call for changes and additions - Less Wrong

27 Post author: Yvain 05 November 2013 03:10AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (154)

Comments (154)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: blacktrance 06 November 2013 03:00:08AM *  6 points [-]

Modifications to existing questions:

  • Clarify what "looking for more relationship partners" means. Perhaps being open to more relationship partners (but not looking actively) should be distinguished from actively looking and from not being open to new partners.

  • "Planning on having more children" - what's the time frame on that? Am I planning to have more children at some point, or in the near future?

  • For "Religious Background", there should probably be a "Protestant" option before "Other Christian". It doesn't make much sense to lump Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism into one group while having Catholics in a separate group.

  • For "Moral Views", make these checkboxes (check as many as apply) rather than mutually exclusive selections, because it's possible to be both a virtue ethicist and a consequentialist, or alternatively a virtue ethicist and a deontologist.

  • For "Alternative Alternative Politics", these should also be checkboxes, as some of these aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm looking forward to the survey. Thanks for doing this again.

Comment author: Vaniver 07 November 2013 05:43:42PM 6 points [-]

"Planning on having more children" - what's the time frame on that? Am I planning to have more children at some point, or in the near future?

Another suggestion, which I like, is to replace "no" with "not now" and "never."

Comment author: [deleted] 06 November 2013 09:56:08AM 0 points [-]

Clarify what "looking for more relationship partners" means. Perhaps being open to more relationship partners (but not looking actively) should be distinguished from actively looking and from not being open to new partners.

I thought the same too, but I couldn't think of any decent wording for “open to more relationship partners (but not looking actively)”.

For "Moral Views", make these checkboxes (check as many as apply) rather than mutually exclusive selections, because it's possible to be both a virtue ethicist and a consequentialist, or alternatively a virtue ethicist and a deontologist.

Do rule consequentialists simultaneously count both as consequentialists and deontologists?

Comment author: blacktrance 06 November 2013 08:00:38PM 2 points [-]

I thought the same too, but I couldn't think of any decent wording for “open to more relationship partners (but not looking actively)”.

Perhaps the three options should be something like "Actively looking for new relationship partners", "Open to new relationship partners, but not actively looking" and "Not open to new relationship partners".

Do rule consequentialists simultaneously count both as consequentialists and deontologists?

Probably not, Consequentialism is fundamentally concerned with consequences (hence the name), which makes it and deontology mutually exclusive.

Comment author: [deleted] 07 November 2013 10:32:04AM 1 point [-]

Perhaps the three options should be something like "Actively looking for new relationship partners", "Open to new relationship partners, but not actively looking" and "Not open to new relationship partners".

Excellent.

Probably not, Consequentialism is fundamentally concerned with consequences (hence the name), which makes it and deontology mutually exclusive.

So consequentialism be it (as I voted in the last two surveys).

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit