Luke_A_Somers comments on Holden's Objection 1: Friendliness is dangerous - LessWrong

11 Post author: PhilGoetz 18 May 2012 12:48AM

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

Comments (428)

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

Comment author: TimS 18 May 2012 02:36:45AM 6 points [-]

There's a chicken and egg issue here. Were pre-existing anti-homosexuality values co-opted into early Judaism? Or did the Judeo-Chiristian ideology spread the values beyond their "natural" spread? The only empirical evidence for this question I can think of is non-Judeo-Christian attitudes. What are the historical attitudes towards homosexuality among East Asians and South Asians?

More broadly, people's attitudes towards women and nerds are just as much expressions of values, not long-ranged utilitarian calculations.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 18 May 2012 03:20:40AM 6 points [-]

Like most of Leviticus, the edicts against homosexuality were an attempt to belatedly change 'have no gods before me' into 'don't have any other gods, period' by banning all of the specific religious practices of the competing local religions, which involved things like, say, eating shellfish, wearing sacred garb composed of mixed fibers, etc.

So maybe some of them were homophobes, but it's not necessary; and if they'd all been homophobes there wouldn't have been a need to establish the rule.

Comment author: TimS 18 May 2012 12:55:52PM 4 points [-]

That's a good point. It fairly strongly suggests that Judeo-Christian anti-homosexuality values would not survive coherent extrapolation because it provides an explanation for why the value was included originally. As JoshuaZ stated, I don't expect religious values whose sole function was religious in-group-ism to persist after a CEV process.

Comment author: [deleted] 20 May 2012 11:51:05AM 0 points [-]

Well, if Christian anti-homosexuality was just a religious in-group-ism, they wouldn't be outraged by non-Christians having sex with members of the other sex any more than by (say) non-Christians eating meat on Lent Fridays. Are they?