= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jack comments on Politics Discussion Thread February 2013 - 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 (146)
This seems like an odd position for someone who spends a relatively larger fraction of his LW time on politics.
Edit: Didn't mean to make it personal. Was just interested in the rationale.
(It's good to have less social pressure against odd-seeming positions, so that they can be freely examined according to their more carefully construed meaning rather than surface appearance.)
Having less pressure against unorthodox or novel positions is a good thing. But I think it makes sense to have minimal social pressure to give some account of apparent discrepancies between actions and beliefs-- since it suggests (though doesn't necessitate) contradictory beliefs somewhere.
This seems to act as an incentive for both resolving the conflict, and for obscuring its presence or nature. I feel that the latter effect can be more damaging, so it might be safer to avoid this pressure. For example, drawing of attention to the presence of an apparent conflict (if it's plausible that it has been missed) that isn't accompanied by (implied) disapproval.
My original comment was about as devoid of implications of disapproval as I could make it. I'd be interested to hear better formulations.