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.

Lumifer comments on [Stub] The problem with Chesterton's Fence - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 05 January 2016 05:10PM

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

Comments (49)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 15 January 2016 03:47:03PM 3 points [-]

All these were done in defiance of precedent and with strong accusations of destroying prosperity.

Chesterton's Fence is not about precedents or maintaining prosperity. Essentially, it's about doing something without having a clue.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 19 January 2016 12:09:21PM 0 points [-]

? I think the definition I use of Chesterton Fences may have expanded somewhat, until it's almost equivalent with Burkean conservatism, or a general argument against "we think that changing something traditional in society will bring benefits, so let's change it".

Comment author: Lumifer 19 January 2016 06:08:09PM 0 points [-]

De gustibus, of course, but I prefer limited and hard definitions to ones that fuzzily expand until they're "almost equivalent" to a large and vague concept...

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 20 January 2016 02:00:39PM *  0 points [-]

I see your point, but I don't think the original Chesterton's fence is a stable concept. Knowing why the person-who-built-the-fence, built the fence, is different from knowing why the fence was built (and allowed to stand). But, as you say, de gustibus (an expression I will steal from now on).