= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vulture comments on Rationality Quotes September 2014 - 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 (379)
Does that happen?
It does to me.Have you tried getting sense out of an NRx or HBD.er?
Haven't tried it myself, but it seems to work for Scott Alexander
NRx are so bad at communicating their position in language inline can understand that they refer to Scotts ANTI reaction faq to explain it. This is the guy who steelmanned Gene "Timecube" Ray. He has superpowers.
“Reactionary Philosophy In An Enormous, Planet-Sized Nutshell” is where he explain what the NR position is and “The Anti-Reactionary FAQ” is where he explains why he disagrees with it. The former is what neoreactionaries have linked to to explain it.
Yes. That's why I'm somewhat surprised he seems to interpret “reptilian aliens” literally.
There no reason to use those nonstandard abbreviations. Neither of them are in Urban dictionary.
NRx is probably neoreactionism but doesn't make it into the first 10 Google results. HBD.er in that spelling seems to be wrong as HBD'er is found when you Google it.
Bracket neoreaction for the time being. I get that you disagree with HBD positions, but do you literally have trouble comprehending their meaning?
Yes. One time someone was moaning about imigrants from countries that don't have a long history of Democracy, and genuinely thought he meant eastern Europeans. He didn't, because they are white Christians and he doesn't object to white Christians. So to understand who he is objecting to, I have to apply a mental filter he has and I don't.
Yes, what they say frequently makes a lot more sense than the mainstream position on the issue in question.
I completely disagree. Their grasp of politics is largely based on meta-contrarianism, and has failed to "snap back" into basing one's views on a positive program whose goodness and rationality can be argued for with evidence.
Huh? HBD'ers are making observations about the world, they do not have a "positive program". As for NRx, they do have a positive program do use evidence to argue for it, see the NRx thread and the various blogs linked there for some examples.