= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on [Link] Five ways to classify belief systems - 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 (9)
It seems as though it should at least be useful to think about what sort of classification one is using. Thanks for realizing that your classification system might be incomplete.
I consider adaptive explanations to be chancy-- it's hard to be sure which features are doing what. And it's interesting that you're more apt to bring in adaptive explanations when you know the least.
For example, Christianity has gotten advantages from being a state religion, but are (as I suspect) the big threats and promises about the afterlife a major hook?
I emphasised I found it a somewhat useful frame for thinking. I really hope I didn't imply in the OP it was the only, best or most complete one!
This reminds me a lot of common failings when using pop evolutionary psychology.