CBHacking comments on Stupid Questions February 2015 - Less Wrong

9 Post author: Gondolinian 02 February 2015 12:36AM

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

Comments (198)

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

Comment author: CBHacking 08 February 2015 07:37:43AM 0 points [-]

Citation still needed

This is not Wikipedia. If you really believe that average people would not behave this way, say so. If not, asking for a citation is just filibustering.

You really think it's appropriate to object to somebody calling out your unsupported claims as unsupported when they are A) obviously disagreeing with you, to the point where there's absolutely no need to explicitly state it, and B) providing evidence in support of their own claims, with both reasonable arguments and supporting links? In that case, what would it take to convince you?

we have different opinions on organ selling based on irreconcilable differences in opinion about how human beings behave

(Emphasis mine) Should I take it that this is then something you can't actually be convinced of by anything short of incontrovertible proof to the contrary?

Most arguments are meant to convince bystanders. I don't believe that bystanders will think that assertion has a significant chance of being false

Data set of one, but I find Lumifer's arguments far more convincing than yours. This is largely based on the fact that they are actually backed up by something more than the assumption that everybody begins with your personal model of how people make decisions.

Comment author: Jiro 08 February 2015 10:05:54PM 0 points [-]

Should I take it that this is then something you can't actually be convinced of by anything short of incontrovertible proof to the contrary?

A disagreement about priors is not nontrivially "can't be convinced by anything short of incontrovertible proof".