= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
philh comments on Open thread, August 12-18, 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 (123)
I've decided to start a blog, and I kind of like the name "Tin Vulcan", but I suspect that would be bad PR. Thoughts? (I don't intend it to be themed, but I would expect most of the posts to be LW-relevant.)
(Name origins: Fbzr pbzovangvba bs "orggre guna n fgenj ihypna" naq gur Gva Jbbqzna.)
At least personally, I don't pay very much attention to the titles of blogs: what matters is the content of the articles. So as long as your title isn't something like "Adolf Hitler is my idol", it probably doesn't matter very much. (But I'm generalizing from my own experience, so if someone feels otherwise, please say so.)
I assume prominent Star Trek terms used in a nonfiction context will connote bad superficial pop philosophy and lazy science journalism, so I'd prefer something different.
Hm. I feel like I'm not particularly worried about those connotations, though maybe I should be. I'm more worried about connoting "thinks Vulcans have the right idea" and/or "thinks he is as logical as a Vulcan".
It also occurs to me that having watched essentially no Star Trek, my model of a straw Vulcan is really more of a straw straw Vulcan, and that seems bad.
Currently leaning towards "picking a different title if I come up with one soon-ish".
I would be very hesitant to invoke a fictional philosophical concept I wasn't familiar with. You are invoking related concepts and ideas, and your unfamiliarity with the source material could easily cause readers who are familiar with that material to misread your message.
In short, you are setting yourself up for long inferential distance, which I would not recommend.