LESSWRONG
LW

All of BrotherNihil's Comments + Replies

Interesting critique of British education by outgoing advisor (warning: some politics)
BrotherNihil00

I agree that trans-disciplinary, integrative, complex systems thinking needs to become an important and respectable field in its own right. Nexialism anyone?

Reply
Advice for a smart 8-year-old bored with school
BrotherNihil10

I became a trouble-maker. By the fifth grade I was doing advanced math self-study in a corner and hanging out with the class hoodlum, smoking pot at recess. The teachers feared me because I saw through their constructs. I was easily the best speller in school, but I used to intentionally spell words wrong in spelling bees just to spite them. I guess I've always been a villain.

Reply
1James_Miller
Thanks for the warning.
Dark Arts 101: Winning via destruction and dualism
BrotherNihil40

If there are three parties, why not employ Ernst Stavro Blofeld's strategy, which he illustrated with the parable of the Siamese fighting fish and applied at SPECTRE vis-à-vis the US and the USSR, whereby you incite the other two parties to fight each other, and when the fight is over you swoop in and attack the weakened victor?

Reply
-3metatroll
Sithlord_Bayesian says you're a poseur...
Notes on Brainwashing & 'Cults'
BrotherNihil60

My observation about cults, from personal experience leading them, is that they are a totally normal mode of human operation. People are always looking for strong leaders with vision, passion and charisma who can organize them for a larger purpose. What distinguishes a cult from a non-cult is that they are outside the norms of the mainstream society (as established by the dominant cults -- i.e. "the culture"). "Cult", "brainwashing", "deprogramming", etc. are terms of propaganda used by the dominant culture to combat... (read more)

Reply
Dahlen180

My observation about cults, from personal experience leading them

* raises eyebrow *

Reply
4Viliam_Bur
There is something like manipulation. To make this a discussion about anticipated experience, here is an experiment proposal: Kidnap a few new members from different religious organizations. (It's just an imaginary experiment.) Keep them for one week isolated from their religious groups: no personal contact, no phone, no books. If they start to do some rituals they were told to do, for example repeat a mantra or sing a song, prevent them from doing so. Otherwise, don't do them any harm, and keep them in a nice environment. -- When the week is over, just let them go. Observe how many of them return to the original group. Compare with a control group of randomly selected people you didn't kidnap; how many of them remained in the group after the week. Are there statistically significant differences for different religious groups? My prediction is that there would be observable differences for different religious groups. I believe there is some pressure involved in the process of recruitment in some religious (or not just religious) groups; some algorithm which increases the chances of membership when done properly, and fails when interrupted. Perhaps "brainwashing" is too strong word, but it a kind of manipulation. It consists of pushing the person towards more expressions of commitment, without giving them time to reflect whether they really want it (whether it is okay with their other values).
8ChristianKl
Speaking about suicide methods in a detailed fact-based way would be a classic example. There's evidence that it increases the number of suicides that happen. There are media guides for journalists who argue against that practice.
blacktrance160

Is it too meta to say "asking questions like this in a place where they're likely to be answered correctly"?

Reply
2RomeoStevens
My Little Pony apparently. Though the sanity destruction seems to be for a very specific subset of the populace.
-1mare-of-night
Well, there's the AI box experiment. Those transcripts could be kept hidden because private, personal things were spoken of, but then people who have done the experiment could tell us that that was the reason for secrecy. Eliazer seems to believe that humanity will be more likely to create and be harmed by a boxed AI if the transcripts are revealed. This is kind of a hard question to answer without crossing the lines that should not be crossed, though. You can really only get an answer about ideas that shouldn't be spoken of only under certain conditions, or ones that can be referred to in a more general sense (like the AI box).
-6metatroll
0[anonymous]
.
2drethelin
The idea that some ideas are far too dangerous to be spoken about is a pretty dangerous one
3niceguyanon
Stupid question, is this even allowed on LW? I remember reading somewhere that stuff like this have been purged before.
Artificial explosion of the Sun: a new x-risk?
BrotherNihil10

An obvious rejoinder to this is that while a Boeing 747 could assemble itself naturally by chance, the fact that we don't see any 747's occurring naturally isn't evidence for their impossibility. Therefore doesn't your point about no sun-like stars going nova only carry weight if we assume that there is other intelligent life in the observable universe?

As a side note, I read somewhere that John von Neumann once had an epiphany in which he imagined that supernovas were the final acts of civilizations that had learned to harness the power of nuclear fusion.... (read more)

Reply
tim130

The absence of 747s spontaneously assembling is evidence for their impossibility. Its just that evidence is completely overwhelmed by all the additional evidence we have indicating that it is possible - evidence which appears lacking from this particular case.

Reply
2gwern
Or nuclear bombs. Why could we apply the same argument here? "We never see any nuclear explosions on earth, either during human history or in the form of radioactive craters, therefore it is very implausible that if we combine specially crafted and refined substances we will get something like that."
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil-30

Your argument is that we shouldn't be nihilists because we're "programmed" not to be? Programmed by what? Doesn't the fact that we're having this conversation suggest that we also have meta-programming? What if I reject your programming and want off this wheel of enjoyment and suffering? What is "normalcy"? I find your comment to be full of baffling assertions!

Reply
1Crux
I was trying to address an idea or attitude some people call "nihilism". If my response was baffling to you, then perhaps this suggests we're using different definitions of this word. What do you personally mean by "nihilism"? What beliefs do you have on this topic, and/or what actions do you take as a result of these beliefs?
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil00

The usual suspects. What are you getting at?

Reply
-3Locaha
Current scientific models of the universe are just that, models. They don't explain everything. They will likely be changed in the future. And there are no reasons to think that they will ever lead us to the one true model that explains everything perfectly forever. So there's no reason to build your personal philosophy upon the assumption that current scientific consensus is what the universe is actually made of.
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil40

Where do you get this strange idea that a nihilist must be gloomy or dress in black?

Reply
0DanielLC
It is a snarky way of asking that very question.
8fubarobfusco
It's a snarky way of asking — Okay, even if nihilism were true, how could that motivate us to behave any differently from how we are already inclined to behave?
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil-10

Why is that a misfortune?

Reply
Shmi350

That was tongue-in-cheek, of course. No need to anthropomorphize the universe. It hates it.

Reply
0PrometheanFaun
I find the strangely indefinite way humans name things interesting, but I try to have a safe amount of disinterest in the actual denotations of the names themselves, especially the ones which seem to throw off paradoxes in every direction when you put your weight on them. Whatever they are, they weren't built to be thought about in any depth.
2linkhyrule5
People "understand" contradictions all the time. See: the Trinity.
-2blacktrance
What is it that they understand? Do they anticipate experiences caused by interaction with a person who claims to be a nihilist? That's plausible. Do they fully understand the belief? That's a different question.
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil20

Can you elaborate? I don't understand this.

Reply
0hairyfigment
What's a nihilist, and how would you distinguish it empirically from Eliezer? If you meant to ask why we don't benefit your tribe politically by associating ourselves with it: we don't see any moral or practical reason to do so. It it turns out that nihilists have actually faced discrimination from the general public in the ways atheists have (and therefore declaring ourselves nihilists would help them at our slight expense), I might have to reconsider. Though happily, I don't belong to a religion that requires this, even if I turn out to meet the dictionary definition.
4Bobertron
Rationalist taboo is a technique for fighting muddles in discussions. By prohibiting the use of a certain word and all the words synonymous to it, people are forced to elucidate the specific contextual meaning they want to express, thus removing ambiguity otherwise present in a single word. Take free will as an example. To my knowledge, many compatiblists (free will and determinism are compatible) and people who deny that free will exist do not disagree on anything other than what the correct label for their position is. I imagine the same can often be said about nihilism.
8ZankerH
Ask "Why are you not a nihilist?", replacing the word "nihilist" with a phrase that objectively explains it to a person unfamiliar with the concept of nihilism.
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil-20

What makes you think that nihilism makes me miserable, or that nihilism is boring? I find that it can be liberating, exciting and fun. I was just curious to know how other intelligent people thought about it. This idea that nihilists are miserable or suicidal seems like propaganda to me -- I see no reason why nihilists can't be as happy and successful as anyone else.

Reply
0mwengler
What makes you think that I have an opinion one way or another about what nihilism does for you? Your original post asked why I wasn't a nihilist. If you are a nihilist and that helps you be happy or fun, bully for you!
Yet more "stupid" questions
BrotherNihil10

My stupid questions are these: Why are you not a nihilist? What is the refutation of nihilism, in a universe made of atoms and the void? If there is none, why have the philosophers not all been fired and philosophy abolished?

Reply
0PrometheanFaun
I'm sorry if my kind ever confused you by saying things like "It is important that I make an impressive display in the lek", what I actually mean is "It is likely my intrinsic goals would be well met if I made an impressive display in the lek". There is an ommitted variable in the original phrasing. Its importance isn't just a function of our situation, it's a function of the situation and of me, and of my value system. So I think the real difference between nihilists and non-nihilists as we may call them, is that non-nihilists [think they]have a clearer idea of what they want to do with their life. Life's purpose isn't written on the void, it's written within us. Nobody sane will argue otherwise. Actually... "within".. now I think of it, the only resolute nihilist I've probed has terrible introspection relative to myself, and it took a very long time to determine this, introspective clarity doesn't manifest as you might expect. This might be a lead.
2ChristianKl
Fired by whom?
0Armok_GoB
I am a machine bent on maxemizing the result of a function when run over the multiverse, that measures the amount of certain types of computation it is isomorphic to.
7knb
Simple: You're allowed to have values even if they aren't hard-coded into the fabric of the universe.
0drethelin
I'm a nicilist instead
-4scientism
There's only two options here. Either the universe is made of atoms and void and a non-material Cartesian subject who experiences the appearance of something else or the universe is filled with trees, cars, stars, colours, meaningful expressions and signs, shapes, spatial arrangements, morally good and bad people and actions, smiles, pained expressions, etc, all of which, under the appropriate conditions, are directly perceived without mediation. Naturalism and skeptical reductionism are wholly incompatible: if it was just atoms and void there would be nothing to be fooled into thinking otherwise.
1Locaha
Who told you the universe is made of atoms and the void?
1Crux
A good quote on this: In other words, even though it's true that every war, every destroyed relationship, every wonderful interaction, and everything else that's ever occurred in history happened on the pale blue dot, most likely quite ephemeral in its existence by contrast to the rest of the universe, this doesn't change about the fact that we as humans are programmed to care about certain things--things that do exist at this time, however transient they would be from a universe perspective--and this is the source of all enjoyment and suffering. The goal is to be on the 'enjoyment' side of it, of course. Nihilism is just a confusion, a failure to take seriously the maxim 'it all comes back to normalcy'.
9blacktrance
Before I can answer the question, I need to have some idea of what "nihilism" means in this context, because there are many different varieties of it. I assume this is the most common one, the one that proposes that life is meaningless and purposeless. If this isn't the kind of nihilism you're referring to, please correct me. To answer the question, I'm not a nihilist because nihilism is conceptually mistaken. For example, suppose there is a stick, a normal brown wooden stick of some length. Now, is that stick a meter long or not? Whether it is or isn't, that question is conceptually sound, because the concept of stick has the attribute "length", which we can compare to the length of a meter, Is the stick morally just? This question isn't conceptually sound, because "justice" isn't an attribute of a stick. A stick isn't just, unjust, or morally gray, it completely lacks the attribute of "justice". How does this apply to life? If you ask whether life is meaningless, that presupposes that conceptually life can have a meaning in the same way a stick can be a meter long - that "meaning" is an attribute of life. However, meaning is informational - words have meanings, as do symbols and signals in general. When I say "apple", you can imagine an apple, or at least know what I'm talking about, which means that the word "apple" is meaningful to both of us. If I say "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously", it doesn't bring anything to mind, so that phrase is meaningless. Life lacks the attribute of "meaning", because it's not information that's being communicated. Therefore, to say "life has no meaning" is more similar to saying "the stick is unjust" than to "the stick is shorter than a meter". That deals with "life is meaningless". How about "life is purposeless"? To answer that question, consider where purpose comes from - from using something to achieve a desire. For example, if I say "a hammer's purpose is to hammer in nails", what that really means is something more
4RolfAndreassen
Define 'nihilism'.
Eliezer Yudkowsky160

In a universe made of atoms and the void, how could it be the one true objective morality to be gloomy and dress in black?

Reply
3DanielLC
Death - SMBC Theater Listen to the last guy.
Kaj_Sotala110

Why are you not a nihilist?

For the same reason why I don't just lie down and stop doing anything at all. Knowledge of the fact that there isn't any ultimate meaning doesn't change the fact that there exist things which I find enjoyable and valuable. The part of my brain that primarily finds things interesting and valuable isn't wired to make its decisions based on that kind of abstract knowledge.

Why are you even reading this comment? :-)

What is the refutation of nihilism, in a universe made of atoms and the void?

"Sure, there is no ultimate purp... (read more)

Reply
8blacktrance
If you taboo the word "nihilism", the question almost answers itself.
0Brillyant
I found myself experiencing a sort of "emotional nihilism" after de-converting from Christianity... To your questions: 1. I don't know that I'm not, though I don't really define myself that way. I don't know if life or the universe has some ultimate/absolute/objective purpose (and I suspect it does not) or even what "purpose" really means... but I'm content enough with the novelty and intrigue of learning about everything at the moment that nihilism seems a bit bleak for a label to apply to myself. (Maybe on rainy days?) 2. I don't know. I'd also be interested to hear a good refutation. I suppose one could say "you are free to create your own meaning" or something like that...and then you'd have personally thwarted nihilism. Meh. 3. I gotta believe a good chunk of the world still believes in meaning of some kind, if for no other reason than their adherence to religion. This is an economic reason for the survival of philosophy and ongoing speculation about meaning -- Clergy are often are just philosophers with magical pre-suppositions & funny outfits. And, practically speaking, it seems like purpose/meaning is a pretty good thing to stubbornly look for even when facing seemingly irrefutable odds. Hm... maybe you could say the refutation of nihilism is the meaning you find in not giving up the search for meaning even though things seem meaningless? I know they love meta concepts around here...
7Shmi
This uncaring universe had a misfortune to evolve macroscopic structures who do care about it and each other, as a byproduct of their drive to procreate.
2mwengler
For me, I am not a nihilist because nihilism is boring. Also nihilism is a choice about how to see things, choosing nihilism vs non-nihilism does not come from learning more about the world, it comes from choosing something. I am at least a little bit of a nihilist, there is plenty that I deny. I deny god, and more importantly, I deny a rational basis for morality or any human value or preference. I behave morally, more than most, less than some, but I figure i do that because I am genetically programmed to do so, and there is not enough to be gained by going against that. So I feel good when I bring my dog to the park because he has been genetically programmed to hack in to the part of my brain that I use for raising my children when they are babies, and I get powerful good feelings when I succumb to the demands of that part of my brain. It makes no more rational sense to embrace nihilism than to deny it. It is like picking chocolate vs. vanilla, or more to the point, like picking chocolate vs poop-flavored. Why pick the one that makes you miserable when it is no more or less true than the one that is fun?