You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RichardKennaway comments on Approaching rationality via a slippery slope - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: paulfchristiano 04 April 2011 05:51AM

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

Comments (11)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 05 October 2015 11:09:20AM *  1 point [-]

If one circulated a message on the internet saying that donations could save the life of a specific child, obviously if you then used the money for something unrelated there would be laws against that. But if you simply, say, A: lied about why they were in danger of dying, B: overstated the amount of money needed, C: left out the nationality of the child, and D: Used the money to save a large number of children, do you think a court would convict that?

You have just rediscovered the idea, "I know, why not just lie!" On which, see this.

I predict that (a) you would be found out, (b) if it came to court, the court would convict (fraud in a good cause is still fraud), and (c) so would the forum of public opinion.

ETA: See also.