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.

DeVliegendeHollander comments on Open Thread, May 11 - May 17, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 11 May 2015 12:16AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (247)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (247)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 18 May 2015 08:29:22AM 1 point [-]

Apart from that "status" is a word that's quite abstract. It's much more something "map" than "territory".

Let's get more meta here. Usually the map-terrain distinction is used to describe how human minds interpret the chunks of reality that are not man-made. When we are talking about something that arises from the behavior of humans, how can we draw that distinction. Plato's classic "What is justice?" is map or terrain? Here the terrain is in human minds too, as justice exists only inside minds and nowhere else, so the distinction seems to be more like is it the grand shared map or a more private map of maps? And the same with status. It does not exist outside the human perception of it. Similar to money, esp. paper/computer number money.

I don't think that there a good reason to believe that if you take status away no neurotically would engage in social mingling or like engaging in it.

I will consider it a typo, assuming you meant neurotypicals like I did i.e. people outside the autism spectrum, or in other words non-geeks. I got the idea from here. If status microtransactions are so important...

(to be continued gotta go now)

Comment author: ChristianKl 18 May 2015 12:46:45PM 0 points [-]

If you look at the link you posted it argues:

Status is a confusing term, unless it’s understood as something one does. You may be low in status, but play high, and vice versa. … We always like it when a tramp is mistaken for the boss, or the boss for a tramp. … I should really talk about dominance and submission, but I’d create a resistance.

That means that dominance and submission map more directly to the territory than status does.

The author doesn't argue that people care about mutually reinforcement of each other status as being high but that people also consciously make moves to submit and place themselves at a low status position.

The text invalidates your idea that people engage primarily in social interaction to maximize the amount of status.

You don't pick that up if you make the error of not treating status as a model but as reality. Reality is complex. Models simplify reality. Sometimes the simplification keeps the essential elements of what you want to describe. Other times it doesn't.

I will consider it a typo, assuming you meant neurotypicals like I did i.e. people outside the autism spectrum, or in other words non-geeks.

Yes, it's a typo likely because my spellchecker didn't know "neurotypicals".

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit