= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on Dark Arts 101: Winning via destruction and dualism - 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 (53)
It is not complaining about the two-party system. It is about a much more general phenomenon, found widely in academia. It is important to note that in any domain, whenever you reduce the number of alternatives to two, it sets the stage for vicious partisanship. I happen to think it's a very important point.
The post isn't sarcastic; it's humorous, taking on the persona of a Dark Arts instructor.
Only a sith would think that only a sith deals in absolutes. I reject your absolutist opposition to absolutes.
Sometimes there really are just two choices. Dualisms get a bad rap.
So that step one in the Light Arts is to increase the alternatives?
Dunno about "step one" or "Light Arts", but that's usually among my first responses to being offered a forced choice between A and B... what are the alternatives that aren't being considered?
Not so much to avoid vicious partisanship... people can be viciously partisan for their side no matter how many competing sides there are... but because it's hard to consider the merits of options that have been arbitrarily excluded from consideration, and those options often prove viable when their merits are considered.
I am especially prone to this for subjects where certain positions have become popular tribal markers.
Could you give academic examples?