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.

buybuydandavis comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, March 2015, chapter 117 - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: Gondolinian 08 March 2015 07:00PM

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

Comments (152)

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

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 March 2015 06:23:45PM 0 points [-]

suggests that people dying is irrelevant to whether one rejoices over a worthwhile tradeoff or not.

I don't see how you got that from what I said. I said "trade off" - that implies relevance.

Comment author: Velorien 09 March 2015 06:43:52PM 0 points [-]

I guess I misread your tone. The way you put "sometimes that involves people dying" immediately after "you rejoice" made it seem like the former was an afterthought.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 March 2015 11:35:13PM *  0 points [-]

Maybe you were psychic about my tone.

Retribution. Vengeance. Justice. Comeuppance. I value that somewhat. Bad guys should get what they've got coming. I understand that not everyone approves of such sentiments, and probably a lot of people here. I look at it as a predictable adaptation in line with rule consequentialism. But I also understand that some value it much more viscerally than I do.

I recall Peter Hitchens opening a window into his mind one day. Basically, he didn't want to live in a universe without Justice built in, which from him I take as bad people not getting get their comeuppance. He wants God to settle the scores. He seems very committed to bad guys getting their just deserts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ATJ23ftuho

Starts around 13:30. Around 14:30 is another chunk.