TraderJoe comments on 37 Ways That Words Can Be Wrong - Less Wrong

72 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 06 March 2008 05:09AM

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

Comments (70)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: spindizzy 06 March 2008 06:55:43PM 4 points [-]

Eliezer: "In the original case, I talked about wiggins. Here, summarizing, I have to pick a better-known example of how arbitrarily excluding something is not only bad, but a case of trying to get away with something without justifying it."

At the risk (certainty?) of sounding churlish, ad Hitlerum is not a convenient shorthand. It's a logical fallacy which you've used a couple of times here. Being on guard against such thought patterns is the point of this blog.

Suppose that I referred to the non-human status of a 20 week foetus as an example of how "arbitrarily excluding something is not only bad, but a case of trying to get away with something without justifying it".

This isn't the space to air our political views.

Incidentally, I am pro-death and well aware that negroes are human (although I don't need quotation marks around the word "negro", except where required by grammar).

As I said, sorry to sound churlish.

Comment author: TraderJoe 27 April 2012 08:27:41AM *  0 points [-]

[comment deleted]

Comment author: MixedNuts 27 April 2012 09:54:51AM 4 points [-]

Wait, is that the opposite of "pro-life", or the opposite of "pro-immortality"?