= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
AngryParsley comments on A hypothetical candidate walks into a hypothetical job interview... - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (65)
I don't think I can give very good answers to your questions. I'm much better at morality discussion closer to the object-level.
Sure, but I wish to have correct beliefs.
There are lots of things I don't say, especially during job interviews.
Actually, yes. I'm pretty sure I am not a supporter or voluntary member of any organization that causes as much harm as the Catholic church.
AngryParsley:
So does everyone, at some level. But in my experience, whenever I felt superior over people because I didn't share some of their beliefs that seemed crazy to me, after several years I'd usually feel embarrassed on recollection, considering how much even stupider stuff I believed myself at the same time. From what I've observed, once you've assessed someone's character and abilities relevant to the business at hand, making conclusions based on their general religious and ideological beliefs is a fool's game, unless perhaps it's something that just screams weirdness.
Well, that depends not just on factual questions, but also on normative questions of how exactly harm should be quantified. But still, I'd point out that the same principle applies here. You're talking about an institution that faces strong opposition by many prominent high-status people, and you've clearly been exposed to their convincingly argued accusations against it. However, are you really sure that all the institutions that command much more unanimous respect and allegiance by respectable people, and are attacked only by various disreputable fringe individuals, could not be blamed equally convincingly by a truly neutral observer?
Same here; I get embarassed at how that moronic pretentious former-me kept feeling superior to others.
Are you an American citizen?
That's why I said "voluntary." Taxes aren't optional.
One can give up citizenship and emigrate. The barrier to exit is higher but it is still at some level voluntary (although it might be that there's some point where the term voluntary shouldn't be applied and this may be above that level. I'm not sure.). Also, note that if instead of measuring harm one measures harm against good dealt, the US government might come out better than the Catholic church by some measures of harm and good.
Depending on how you feel about the effectiveness of their charities the Catholic church might come out looking pretty good too.
That's a valid point. Hence my use of the weak language "might" and not a strong statement.