Comment author: thomblake 04 October 2012 01:59:09PM 33 points [-]

"grass is green" and "sky is blue" are always funny examples to me, since whenever I hear them I go check, and they're usually not true. Right now from my window, I can see brown grass and a white/gray sky.

So they're especially good examples, as people will actually use them as paradigms of indisputably true empirical propositions, and even those seem almost always to be a mismatch between the map and the territory.

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 29 December 2015 11:03:56AM 1 point [-]

As an experiment, a couple raised their child without telling them what colour the sky was. When they eventually asked, the child... thought about it. Eventually... "white". (I'd assumed it was a clear sky. Just realised it's a pointless story if it was cloudy.)

Why Isn't the Sky Blue? - starts with colours in Homer.

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 20 November 2015 09:41:32PM 0 points [-]

I can't answer your questions about / criticisms of my belief, but if you ask my guru (or read his book), he'll definitely have the answers to all your questions."

(Or "her book" etc - but the examples I've come across have all used men as their infallible guru.)

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 20 November 2015 07:12:24AM 0 points [-]

I found the last paragraph-sentence impossible to understand. I may just be not thinking straight, but it could be made clearer, and I'm posting about my confusion because I'm sure there'll be others who are also confused.

"actually does have a certain number of exemplars in real life" refers to the "honest people not being good at lying" theory, plus the risk of huge blow-ups from end of lies.

"though obvious selective reporting is at work in our hearing about this one" clearly refers to this sensational case of someone who was mostly good at lying, but left an entangled trace... Einfeld turned out to be a dishonest person (who was remarkably successful at lying, for a long time), so I'm not sure how that relates. The use of "though" was the first thing that confused me, but then I realised that the whole paragraph confuses me.

Meetup : Melbourne Social Meetup - November

1 Chriswaterguy 18 November 2015 10:32AM

Discussion article for the meetup : Melbourne Social Meetup - November

WHEN: 20 November 2015 06:30:00PM (+1100)

WHERE: 347 Flinders Lane, Melbourne, Vic, Australia

Our November Social Meetup is on again this Friday! (3rd Friday of the month as always.) Come & say hi for the first time, or for the 50th time. Hope to see you there. It's a casual get-together where we chat about interesting topics and sometimes play tabletop games (optional, and only if someone brings a game). Where? The Bull & Bear Tavern, 347 Flinders Ln, Melbourne. (If you're walking from Elizabeth St, it's most of the way to Queen St, on your left. Go down one flight of stairs to the bistro area.) When? From 6:30pm until late. Start and finish times are very loose - feel free to show up whenever Contact? If you have any questions, just text or call me (Chris) on 0439471632 Dinner? The Bull & Bear serves regular pub food, and the kitchen closes around 9pm. We have a tradition of going to Stalactites (24 hour Greek restaurant) for a late-night souvlaki after the meetup, if you'd like to wait!

Discussion article for the meetup : Melbourne Social Meetup - November

Comment author: MixedNuts 27 August 2012 01:58:00PM 4 points [-]

it would be good to find a version that doesn't assume that women are not merely materialistic, but assess prospective mates solely on their net worth

That deep stacking of negatives is confusing. Did you mean: "This version assumes that women are materialistic - worse than just materialistic, it assumes that women assess prospective mates solely on their net worth. It would be good to find a version that doesn't assume that."?

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 01 September 2012 04:23:31PM *  2 points [-]

Sorry, I left an extra "not" and an extra "but" in. What a horrible sentence - I apologize.

Did you mean: "This version assumes that women are materialistic - worse than just materialistic, it assumes that women assess prospective mates solely on their net worth. It would be good to find a version that doesn't assume that."?

Yes - thank you.

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 27 August 2012 01:43:01PM *  4 points [-]

I appreciate the value of the illustrations, but it would be good to find a version that doesn't assume that women are merely materialistic, assessing prospective mates solely on their net worth. Geek communities are often not friendly places for women - some readers will accept the assumptions for the sake of argument, but some are likely to take offence.

Edited when MixedNuts pointed out how confused the original version was. My apologies.

Comment author: [deleted] 16 August 2012 10:47:22PM 12 points [-]

The problem with therapy-- include self help and mind hacks-- is its amazing failure rate. People do it for years and come out of it and feel like they understand themselves better but they do not change. If it failed to produce both insights and change it would make sense, but it is almost always one without the other.

-- The Last Psychiatrist

In response to comment by [deleted] on Rationality Quotes August 2012
Comment author: Chriswaterguy 21 August 2012 01:31:59PM 0 points [-]

Is it our bias towards optimism? (And is that bias there because pessimists take fewer risks, and therefore don't succeed at much and therefore get eliminated from the gene pool?)

I heard (on a PRI podcast, I think) a brain scientist give an interpretation of the brain as a collection of agents, with consciousness as an interpreting layer that invents reasons for our actions after we've actually done them. There's evidence of this post-fact interpretation - and while I suspect this is only part of the story, it does give a hint that our conscious mind is limited in its ability to actually change our behavior.)

Still, people do sometimes give up alcohol and other drugs, and keep new resolutions. I've stuck to my daily exercise for 22 days straight. These feel like conscious decisions (though I may be fooling myself) but where my conscious will is battling different intentions, from different parts of my mind.

Apologies if that's rambling or nonsensical. I'm a bit tired (because every day I consciously decide to sleep early and every day I fail to do it) and I haven't done my 23rd day's exercise yet. Which I'll do now.

Comment author: [deleted] 13 May 2012 11:54:40PM 4 points [-]

Open Thread in Discussion section.

In response to comment by [deleted] on Petition: Off topic area
Comment author: Chriswaterguy 14 May 2012 01:19:59AM 9 points [-]

Open Thread doesn't quite do what the OP is looking for. Open Thread is: A. a bit hard to find (I didn't know it existed, and only found it through the site search) B. a single thread at any one time. Makes it hard to find or follow a particular topic.

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 22 March 2012 03:02:37PM 3 points [-]

Nothing original just now - I just want to go on record as saying that HP:MOR is amazing, brilliant work - I really enjoy it, as well as learning from it.

Comment author: nikita 18 October 2011 08:31:32AM 2 points [-]

Please hit me up (send message) if you have any questions about the event.

Comment author: Chriswaterguy 08 January 2012 10:25:34AM 0 points [-]

How did it go?

Btw, I'm in Canberra until ~23rd Jan, and would love to meet other LessWrongers.

I'll be busy at RecentChangesCamp on 20-22 Jan (great event if you're into wikis). So I'm really hoping for something between now and 19 Jan.

View more: Prev | Next