= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Cerberus
In response to
[SEQ RERUN] The Opposite Sex
- Understanding the opposite sex is hard. Not as hard as understanding an AI, but it's still attempting empathy across a brainware gap: trying to use your brain to understand something that is not like your brain.
As Eliezer so often asks, could you be more specific?
I'm having trouble thinking of specific examples of the opposite sex being harder to understand than my own and thus I don't really understand EY's statement.
Makes sense if you assume EY had a poor model of women's sexuality and romantic preferences, which is remarkably easy since most of pop culture is basically disinformation on the subject.
Hmm this is a bit fuzzy, as I said - part of my problem is that I just have a vague feeling and am having difficulty making it less vague. But:
- an uncomfortable air of superiority
- a bit too much association with right wing politics.
- Some of the PUA stuff is a bit weird (not discussed directly on the site so much but in related contexts)
It would very much help if you could name three examples of each of your complaints, this would help you see if this really is the source of your unease. It would also help others figure out if you are right.
an uncomfortable air of superiority
Overestimating our rationality and generally feeling clearer thinkers than anyone ever? Or perhaps unwilling to update on outside ideas like Konkvistador recently complained?
a bit too much association with right wing politics.
There is a lot of right wing politics on the IRC channel, but overall I don't think I've seen much on the main site. On net the sites demographics are if anything remarkably left-wing.
Some of the PUA stuff is a bit weird (not discussed directly on the site so much but in related contexts)
The PUA stuff may come off as weird due to inferential distances or people accumulating strange ideas because they can't sanity check them. Both are the result of the community norm that sort now seems to strongly avoid gender issues because we've proven time and again to be incapable of discussing them as we do most other things. This is a pattern that seems to go back to the old OB days.
In response to
Conspiracy Theories as Agency Fictions
The Heterosexual White Males example rubs me the wrong way. I haven't heard of what I'd call conspiracy theories about that, and it doesn't match the ridiculousness of Satan or the Illuminati. It reads like someone who wants to get back at feminists or whomever, you know. A politically motivated and sort of mean-spirited low blow. I mean, maybe there are a bunch of people that believe that on a level that matches the rest of the examples, but this is the vibe I got.
I've had enough of your disingenuous assertions.
Gains Renegade Points
I'm going with this commenter being Will. What do I win?
I'm going with this commenter being Will.
I've had enough of your snide insinuations.
Gains Renegade Points
Haven't I given you enough of a hint with all this drama? I gave you what I could -- the world is out there, you can explore it yourself, Commander.
I'll talk to you later.
I was going to say about how I'm sorry, didn't mean any insult, how I saw and heard some evidence for that judgment around here before... but ah, screw it, everyone can plainly see that I'm trying to act like an RPG hero, negotiating conflicts with the most authority and Deep Wisdom that his (my) dialogue options allow. ;)
You need more paragon points before that will work.
Because we have to down vote him.
But he didn't do anything wrong before this.
In response to
This post is for sacrificing my credibility!
Why is Will Newsome doing this? My model of him just broke.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Good post! Thank you for writing it Luke =)
"god this is even more phygish than just that quote about eliezer getting fed mnms"