sfb comments on Rationality quotes: October 2010 - LessWrong

4 Post author: Morendil 05 October 2010 11:38AM

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

Comments (472)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 06 October 2010 06:16:02PM *  6 points [-]

Really? A claim like this needs some evidence. George Orwell novels don't count.

I never read it. I understand there were pigs involved.

I recommend Steven Pinker's The Language Instinct, which clarifies to what extent language can influence thought.

I liked Pinker when I read other stuff of his but I haven't got to that book yet.. Now, back to thinking about good modularity and DRY while writing OISC machine code.

(In case my meaning was not clear, let me be explicit. You made the response "A claim like this needs some evidence" to a comment that actually referred to evidence. Even if you think there is other, stronger, evidence that contradicts what we can infer from observing the influence of language on programmers it is still poor conversational form to reply with "needs non-Orwell evidence".)

Comment author: sfb 06 October 2010 09:45:12PM *  4 points [-]

I never read it. I understand there were pigs involved.

I guess you are referring to Newspeak, which is in "1984" whereas pigs are in "Animal Farm". If you wish to read either, (George) Orwell's writings and books are available online for free (I don't know what the copyright situation is) here:

http://www.george-orwell.org/

Comment author: wedrifid 07 October 2010 04:45:46AM 4 points [-]

I guess you are referring to Newspeak, which is in "1984" whereas pigs are in "Animal Farm".

My point was that I was not referring to anything by Orwell, having read none of his works.

Thankyou for the link. I suppose I wouldn't be doing my nerdly duty if I didn't read Orwell eventually. Even though from what I've seen the sophisticated position is to know what's in Orwell but to look down your nose at him somewhat for being simplistic.