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.

yew comments on The Singularity Institute's Arrogance Problem - Less Wrong Discussion

63 Post author: lukeprog 18 January 2012 10:30PM

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

Comments (307)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 January 2012 07:37:32PM *  9 points [-]

I believe that. My first-pass filter for theories of why some people think SIAI is "arrogant" is whether the theory also explains, in equal quantity, why those same people find Harry James Potter-Evans-Verres to be an unbearably snotty little kid or whatever. If the theory is specialized to SIAI and doesn't explain the large quantities of similar-sounding vitriol gotten by a character in a fanfiction in a widely different situation who happens to be written by the same author, then in all honesty I write it off pretty quickly. I wouldn't mind understanding this better, but I'm looking for the detailed mechanics of the instinctive sub-second ick reaction experienced by a certain fraction of the population, not the verbal reasons they reach for afterward when they have to come up with a serious-sounding justification. I don't believe it, frankly, any more than I believe that someone actually hates hates hates Methods because "Professor McGonagall is acting out of character".

Comment author: [deleted] 19 January 2012 08:55:19PM *  2 points [-]

Self-reference and any more than a moderate degree of certainty about anything that isn't considered normal by whoever happens to be listening are both (at least, in my experience) considered less than discreet.

Trying to demonstrate that one isn't arrogant probably qualifies as arrogance, too.

I don't know how useful this observation is, but I thought it was at least worth posting.