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.

Azathoth123 comments on Open thread, 11-17 August 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: David_Gerard 11 August 2014 10:12AM

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

Comments (268)

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

Comment author: Azathoth123 13 August 2014 05:15:51AM 1 point [-]

My thinking about Moloch is still too fuzzy for good definitions

Moloch is based on the neo-reactionaries' Gnon. Notice how Nyan deals with the fuzziness by dividing Gnon into four components, each of which can be analyzed individually. Apparently Yvain's brain went into "basilisk shock" up on exposure to the content, which is why his description is so fuzzy.

Comment author: [deleted] 16 August 2014 01:42:45AM 4 points [-]

Maybe genealogically, but Moloch and Gnon are two completely different concepts.

Gnon is a personalization of the dictates of reality, as stated in the post defining it. Every city in the world has the death penalty for stepping in front of a bus -- who set that penalty? Gnon did. Civilizations thrive when they adhere to the dictates of Gnon, and collapse when they cease to adhere to them. And so on. The structure is mechanistic/horroristic (same thing, in this case): "Satan is evil, but he still cares about each human soul; while Cthulhu can destroy humanity and never even notice." (in the comments here) Gnon is Cthulhu. Gnon doesn't care what you think about Gnon. Gnon doesn't care about you at all. But if you don't care about Gnon, you can't escape the cost.

There's nothing dualistic about Gnon: there's only the spectrum from adherence to rebellion. Moloch vs. Elua, on the other hand, is totally Manichaean: the 'survive-mode' dictates of Gnon are identified with Moloch, the evil god of multipolar traps and survival-necessitated sacrifices, and Moloch must be defeated by creating a new god to take over the world and enforce one specific morality and one specific set of dictates everywhere.

(Land, Meltdown: "Philosophy has an affinity with despotism, due to its predilection for Platonic-fascist top-down solutions that always screw up viciously.")

Comment author: Emile 17 August 2014 05:10:57PM 0 points [-]

Philosophy has an affinity with despotism, due to its predilection for Platonic-fascist top-down solutions that always screw up viciously.

"Platonic-fascist top-down solutions" that didn't screw up viciously: universal education, the hospital system, unified monetary systems, unified weights and measures, sewers, enforcement of a common code of laws, traffic signals, municipal street cleaning...

Comment author: Azathoth123 18 August 2014 07:29:09AM 4 points [-]

unified monetary systems

A lot of people would argue that this is in fact in the process of screwing up right now.

enforcement of a common code of laws

This really didn't develop top-down.

Comment author: Nornagest 16 August 2014 06:26:31AM *  -1 points [-]

Strictly speaking I don't think an answer to Moloch has to be in the form of a totalizing ethic, although it sure makes it easier if it is.

Comment author: Lumifer 13 August 2014 02:44:05PM 0 points [-]

Moloch is based on the neo-reactionaries' Gnon

That's not self-evident to me. At the levels of abstraction we're talking about, the idea of opaque, uncaring, often perverse, and sometimes malevolent system/universe/reality is really a very old and widespread meme.

Comment author: Azathoth123 13 August 2014 11:07:25PM 3 points [-]

Personalizing it in quite this way was based on Gnon. Also the level of abstraction we (i.e., Yvain) are talking about it's impossible to say much of anything meaningful as you yourself noted in the grandparent.

Comment author: kalium 14 August 2014 03:17:46AM 0 points [-]

Or it's based on the poem "Howl," which uses the term Moloch and is quoted in full in the post.