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.

somervta comments on "Stupid" questions thread - Less Wrong Discussion

40 Post author: gothgirl420666 13 July 2013 02:42AM

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

Comments (850)

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

Comment author: somervta 21 November 2013 05:58:58AM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure what twist of thinking would allow you to classify murder as ordinary;

I was speaking of a world in which it was more so.

There's a rather marked difference between common and ordinary.

Um, OK? What is it? I'd respond to the rest of your comment, but I think it's going to hinge on this. If you're not using 'ordinary' as a synonym for 'common', then how are you using it?

Comment author: savageorange 21 November 2013 08:16:28AM *  0 points [-]

"CEV" would be the succinct explanation, but I don't expect anybody to necessarily understand that,so..

If you could create a group of 7 non-extremist people randomly selected from the world population and they'd probably manage to agree that action X, even if not optimal, is a reasonable response to the situation, then X is an ordinary action to take.

(whether it's a good action to take is a separate question. ordinariness is just about not containing any fatal flaws which would be obvious from the outside)

Comment author: somervta 21 November 2013 02:43:24PM 0 points [-]

this depends entirely on the construction of the world's population. If most people believe that torturing small animals and children for fun is reasonable, then I would definitely be reacting strongly to an 'ordinary' occurence.

Comment author: savageorange 22 November 2013 01:25:32AM 0 points [-]

True, except for the quotes.