wedrifid comments on Absolute Authority - Less Wrong

44 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 January 2008 03:33AM

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

Comments (72)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: wedrifid 04 March 2011 01:07:47AM 2 points [-]

God must too be omnipotent to make the argument you are looking for.

Your reasoning is correct. The below quote is not self contradictory. You may consider substituting the 'too' with 'also' or moving the word order around to make the sentence flow better. When you are saying things forcefully as with "you screwed that up" it pays to be extra careful with wording - higher standards are expected.

"God exists, he is omniscient, infallible, and he can make a boulder that he cannot lift."

Comment author: bigjeff5 04 March 2011 03:57:22AM *  0 points [-]

I was a little careless with "you screwed that up"; I honestly did not intend for it to sound mean, and I could have chosen better words. I simply meant he obviously intended to use the word omnipotent instead of omnipresent.

Regarding the word too, however, I completely disagree. That is a valid use of the word, unconventional sure, but valid. I've always enjoyed seeing it employed in such a manner.

[Edit] Maybe putting "too" before "must" would sound a little nicer to some, but I liked the way "God must too" sounded in my head.

Comment author: wedrifid 04 March 2011 06:10:21AM 0 points [-]

Regarding the word too, however, I completely disagree. That is a valid use of the word, unconventional sure, but valid. I've always enjoyed seeing it employed in such a manner.

You were curious as to why you were downvoted. That wording would, I predict, have been a contributing factor. Wording significantly influences tone. That wording came across as more petulant or crude as a follow up to 'screwed up' than an alternative would have.

Comment author: bigjeff5 04 March 2011 04:48:55PM *  0 points [-]

I still don't see it as a very good reason for a down vote when nothing in the post is considered incorrect.

I expect not to be up voted if I'm being rude and technically correct, but I don't expect to be down voted. Usually when I'm down voted it is because I'm either factually wrong or I've failed at reasoning. Getting down voted for a phrasing that someone considers a little rude seems odd on this particular website. And honestly, I was not intending to be rude in any way, it is a common phrase when someone makes a mistake. I did not intend to imply anything other than the fact that he used the wrong word in his paradox.

In any case, the points aren't a big deal, and someone corrected it anyway. I was just curious if I had made a mistake, because I didn't see one even after looking over what I wrote a second and third time.

Comment author: thomblake 04 March 2011 07:56:37PM 2 points [-]

Downvotes for rudeness are pretty common. Especially after Defecting by Accident