Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 March 2015 11:28:04PM 2 points [-]

Thanks for the write-up, and yes, engaging with the real world is a lot harder than signalling.

Comment author: private_messaging 29 March 2015 05:35:59AM *  -6 points [-]

Well, a common case of people seeing their family get raped and murdered is occurring right now (ISIS related shit) and the raping is done by religious extremists, so...

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 March 2015 05:51:24AM 0 points [-]


Comment author: RyanCarey 28 March 2015 01:19:20AM *  0 points [-]

Hey Tom, thanks for volunteering to do this.

Personally, I expect this would worsen my experience because it would fragment comments. I'm not going to go to LW to read comments for SSC. I prefer to read comments, if any, on SSC itself.

In general, for most of the people, all they are going to notice (if anything) is a slight decrease in quality of on-site comments, so just a handful of people desiring this does not mean that it's net positive for Scott's readership at large.

Split comment-threads would also reduce cross-pollination of ideas. It's good that LessWrong readers currently bring their ideas in contact with some people who only have vague background awareness of LW at SSC. It's a challenge in practising explaining things well, provides feedback, and spreads useful ways of thinking.

So this would be personally undesirable for me and also has some clear negative externalities on others.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 28 March 2015 04:08:31AM 1 point [-]

One possibility to avoid fragmenting the conversation would be to wait to link to link to a post at SSC until the comments have died down over there.

Comment author: Xerographica 27 March 2015 09:30:17PM 2 points [-]

I really like the idea of blogs "outsourcing" their comments to forums. A second best option would be for Scott to use Disqus for his comments. With Disqus you're always logged in. Plus you can rate comments up or down.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 27 March 2015 09:32:03PM 18 points [-]

I hate disqus. It's hard to keep track of what you're read or haven't read, and since it doesn't load all comments automatically, it's inconvenient to search.

Comment author: JohnBuridan 27 March 2015 05:04:53AM *  6 points [-]

You think that the Will of Melkor could be potentially un-corrupted? Though all evil in Arda is his doing, bitterness, greed, excessive heat, piercing cold, avaricious orcs, other creatures that lust for blood or power, and even darker things than this, that is not enough to despair of him? Aye, you don't yet realize what Morgoth is. He is pride and cruelty and rage. Morgoth's spirit cannot change, because it presumes the only worthwhile fact is its own continued self-expression. His cruelty wishes to wrench all that's beautiful and true in the world into darker purposes, to turn good intentions to bad ends. And his rage, oh, his rage is a starless cry of cosmic dismay that all the evils of the world are undone one by one.

Tell me not of the turning of Melkor, even now he is chained up on the other side of night, yet still whispering his will throughout Middle-Earth, and plotting to break the Gates and return again to destroy the Sun and the Moon and all living things. You are telling me that same guy who wants to tear down all the universe in supreme envy can be turned to work for Good?

This is Morgoth we are talking about, not Anakin Skywalker.

P.S. I take your point; but the Maiar and Valar do act indirectly in Middle-Earth, though creation is over as are the wars against Sauron and Ar-Pharazon. They do not just accept the the gradual decline of the world.

I will never relinquish my Sword of Fandom +10. :)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 27 March 2015 10:29:01AM 3 points [-]

Is Melkor explicitly described as unredeemable?

As I recall, Eru's creation is incomplete, and we cannot know all the outcomes.

Comment author: seer 26 March 2015 09:42:24PM 4 points [-]

I like the idea that it will take inspiration-- the development of a new religion or variant of Islam or alternatively some brilliant satire-- to create something to move people away from IS. It's pretty clear that mere decency isn't motivating enough.

No, the problem is that the West has been slowly rejecting the very concept of decency over the past century.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 March 2015 10:07:28PM 1 point [-]

We are hardly limited to having only one problem.

I'm willing to grant that I've been seeing a slow-moving war on empathy in the West, but I don't think that's the reason Daesh has been influencing people.

Comment author: Lumifer 26 March 2015 06:16:18PM 0 points [-]

Also, I'm not sure what an Islamic Reformation would mean.

I would mean the separation of religion and profane life into separate magisteria.

The problem with Islam is that it claims to be a total religion which guides all aspects of human life including politics, art, etc. Islam never had a "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" moment and routinely calls the Christian separation of sacred and profane life "schizophrenic".

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 March 2015 10:04:08PM 0 points [-]

The idea that religion shouldn't be all of life is a good idea, but I don't think that's what most people mean by a Reformation.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 March 2015 08:23:25PM 1 point [-]

Note the lack of recent names.

Also, Spinoza's God is identical with everything that exists-- it isn't much like the God in most (any?) religions.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 25 March 2015 04:07:55PM *  0 points [-]

development of a new religion or variant of Islam

Perhaps someone who knows more about Bahaism (without being one of them) could tell whether promoting Bahaism might be a way to stop violent Islam.

Bahaism tries to be the next version of Islam, so for people who need religion in their lives it should be easier to convert from Islam to Bahaism, as opposed to Christianity. At this moment, Bahaism seems like a peaceful religion; which of course can be due to the fact that they are an oppressed minority at most places. But still, some peaceful memes could survive even if they would grow.

So, the strategy is that non-Islamic countries should support on their territory the Bahai preachers trying to convert all Islamic immigrants to their faith. First, more peaceful religion is preferable. Second, let's give our enemies one more problem to care about, so they have less time to spend on fighting us.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 March 2015 06:05:34PM 0 points [-]

Bahaism isn't the solution-- if it were, it would have worked already. The same goes for Sufism, though it might be fair to think that the Sufis are working on the problem, but haven't been able to exert enough influence yet.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 26 March 2015 01:13:43AM *  0 points [-]

But the Irish matter is not a religious dispute

I am not really sure what you are trying to say.

Christianity was important in the 17th century, and remained so probably until WWI at least. You can always say that e.g. the 30 year war was really about France vs the HRE, or the HRE infighting, and the whole deal with Bloody Mary was really about dynastic politics in the Kingdom of England, or the IRA was really about reprisal for English territorial ambitions (all based on a counterfactual argument).

I just don't find that very convincing. Obviously things other than religion were going on. This does not change the fact that (a) religion was very important in Europe, (b) a lot of blood was spilled before Europe worked through the Reformation, certainly in England, but also in the HRE, and (c) there are echoes of those events today. You can argue that in the counterfactual world where catholics reformed earlier and there was never a Luther we would still get the same trauma, but I don't know how to evaluate that counterfactual (nor is it that interesting of a question to me -- I care about the world we are in).

My original worry is that the world is in for some pain when Islam's Luther finally nails the Theses to some door. Islam is important to people.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 March 2015 06:01:56PM 0 points [-]

Also, I'm not sure what an Islamic Reformation would mean. Islam is already pretty decentralized.

View more: Next