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.

Vaniver comments on Under-acknowledged Value Differences - Less Wrong Discussion

47 Post author: Wei_Dai 12 September 2012 10:02PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (68)
Tags: community

Comments (68)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Vaniver 12 September 2012 10:55:35PM 20 points [-]

For example, when discussing gender-related problems, it seems inevitable that some proposed solutions will generally be better for men, and other solutions will generally be better for women.

Even this is too simplistic. Polygyny is better for high status men and most women, and bad for low status men and high status women. (And this is before you get to the evolutionary effects, which are both positive and negative and thus hard to judge!)

Comment author: Wei_Dai 14 September 2012 05:34:13PM 4 points [-]

I meant that to be a simple example of how social policies/norms tend to create winners and losers relative to other policies or the status quo, and didn't mean to suggest that the winners and losers of gender-related policies will all or mostly divide along gender lines. I've reworded the sentence to make it clearer. Thanks.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit