Ritalin comments on Open Thread: March 4 - 10 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Coscott 04 March 2014 03:55AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (391)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (391)

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

Comment author: Ritalin 06 March 2014 12:04:58AM -2 points [-]

Here we have another principle: "Have ethics and morals, and be consistent about following them, so that people know what to expect, and don't feel betrayed, cheated, or disappointed.".

In the past I also found it very condensing when other people thought that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me. Give me all the information that I need to make a decision but in the end it's my own decision if I want to risk getting hurt.

Condensing?!

Comment author: ChristianKl 06 March 2014 09:41:52AM 0 points [-]

Here we have another principle: "Have ethics and morals, and be consistent about following them, so that people know what to expect, and don't feel betrayed, cheated, or disappointed.".

That's not the kind of principle that you create as a result of Fault Tree Analysis.

Comment author: Ritalin 06 March 2014 10:53:01AM -1 points [-]

Ah, good! Someone who actually knows about this! Well, help me out here; we do have a causation tree, yes?

"Inconsistent Behavour -> Broken Expectations -> Pereption of Defection".

Comment author: gjm 06 March 2014 01:50:05AM 0 points [-]

Condensing?!

Probably intended to be "condescending".

Comment author: ChristianKl 06 March 2014 09:07:47AM 0 points [-]

Yes. I edited.

Comment author: Ritalin 06 March 2014 11:13:09AM *  -1 points [-]

Then you might want to edit this too: "that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me." The syntax is ambiguous.

I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of "Do not protect me from my own stupidity, give me all the relevant information and let me make my informed decisions as a responsible adult". Problem is,

  • it is possible that the other person is unwilling to share all the relevant info with you (privacy, information hazard, shame, cowardice, dishonesty) or even unable (they don't know or they can't properly put it into words)
  • Even in possession of all relevant information, you may find yourself making the wrong decisions because you're not quite in your right mind. I don't know about you, but when I am high on sexual arousal I can barely even talk.
  • It's not about protecting others from their stupidity, but from your own.
Comment author: gjm 06 March 2014 12:32:07PM 3 points [-]

I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of [...]

I suggest that it is probably counterproductive to make this a debate about identity rather than about issues.

Comment author: ChristianKl 06 March 2014 11:56:59AM 0 points [-]

I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of "Do not protect me from my own stupidity, give me all the relevant information and let me make my informed decisions as a responsible adult"

I do share those sentiments but they don't fully describe my position I'm not focused on the mental stuff.

Even in possession of all relevant information, you may find yourself making the wrong decisions because you're not quite in your right mind. I don't know about you, but when I am high on sexual arousal I can barely even talk.

I might make decisions that bring me emotional pain, but then I'll learn worthwhile lessons.

it is possible that the other person is unwilling to share all the relevant info with you (privacy, information hazard, shame, cowardice, dishonesty) or even unable (they don't know or they can't properly put it into words)

I think it's very useful to learn nonviolent communication to express your emotional needs to give the other person the information he needs.

I however wouldn't say that everyone has to learn nonviolent communication because it's not the only model that works.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit