= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DeVliegendeHollander comments on Social prerequisites of rationality - 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 (32)
It means not-even-attire. When you are not simply following an authority in the sense of "I trust it because X said it" but more in the sense of "X said it, it is not my job to trust, just to obey" it can be called not feeling entitled to judge. The attitude of the bureaucratic clerk who follows rules not because he trusts the higher ups make good rules but because he feels it is not his job to judge if the rules are good.
Beliefs that matter may either change your own actions or other people's actions by them listening to you.
They tend to be illegal or at least socially disapproved which is kind of the point. It is easy to be safe as a conformist who just obeys. They put warning labels on everything these days :)
Not necessarily. That depends on whether the social rules contains good advice. For example, in the Soviet Union blindly obeying all the official commands may very well cause you to starve. Hence most people cheated the system any way they could get away with. While as you observed they wouldn't openly question the official doctrine, their actions tell a different story.
Hm, this is a good point. Clearly felt needs clearly override that. I was thinking more amonst the lines of office red-tape rules conformism, religious etc.