The_Lion comments on Rationality Quotes Thread January 2016 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: elharo 01 January 2016 04:00PM

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

Comments (244)

Sort By: Popular

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

Comment author: The_Lion 03 January 2016 05:29:29AM 4 points [-]

Not all changes are good. In fact, most potential changes would be absolutely awful.

Comment author: Silver_Swift 05 January 2016 04:56:51PM 2 points [-]

That is no reason to fear change, "not every change is an improvement but every improvement is a change" and all that.

Comment author: Glen 06 January 2016 09:00:31PM 1 point [-]

That depends on the situation and record, doesn't it? If 90% of changes that you have undergone in the past were negative, then wouldn't it be reasonable to resist change in the future? Obviously you shouldn't just outright refuse all change, but if you have a chance to slow it down long enough to better judge what the effects will be, isn't that good? I guess the real solution is to judge possible actions by analyzing the cost/benefit to the best of your ability in cases where this is practical.

Comment author: Clarity 13 January 2016 04:38:30AM 0 points [-]

That's a ridiculously pessimistic thing to say

Comment author: Lumifer 13 January 2016 03:50:17PM 2 points [-]

I suspect you read this as "most (well-meaning) potential changes" while The_Lion means it as "most (random) potential changes".

Most random changes to highly organized structures would, indeed, be awful.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 14 January 2016 10:37:40AM 1 point [-]

All the changes that people make are "well-meaning", even those being made by ISIS. A word that better makes the distinction is "intentional".

Comment author: CCC 19 January 2016 10:32:23AM 1 point [-]

Not necessarily. I know that if I get really angry, I sometimes make (generally small) decisions out of a desire to hurt whatever I am angry at. I don't think that counts as "well-meaning".

Comment author: Lumifer 14 January 2016 03:47:55PM 1 point [-]

All the changes that people make are "well-meaning", even those being made by ISIS.

Depends on your definition of "well" and that line of approach would lead us into the usual definitional morass :-/

And, technically speaking, there is also compulsive behaviour.

Comment deleted 14 January 2016 08:05:38AM [-]
Comment author: Lumifer 14 January 2016 03:45:56PM 1 point [-]

The road to hell was never in need of repair.

Comment author: Viliam 25 January 2016 09:03:11AM 0 points [-]

How would you feel about this?

Pareto efficiency, or Pareto optimality, is a state of allocation of resources in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one individual worse off.

Or about a definition of a (local) maximum that says that all other (adjacent) options are worse?

Comment author: Clarity 26 January 2016 04:01:21AM -1 points [-]

I don't have any particular feelings about since I don't see how you are relating it to the quotes. Could you please clarify?

I believe it's a concept and reckon it's a pretty good Wikipedia article...