lumpenspace

Posts

Sorted by New

Wikitag Contributions

Comments

Sorted by

let's try it from the other direction:

do you think stable meta-values are to be observed between australopiteci and say contemporary western humans? on the other hand: do values across primitive tribes or early agricultural empires not look surprisingly similar? third hand: what makes it so that we can look back and compare those value systems, while it would be nigh-impossible for the agents in questions to wrap their head around even something as "basic" as representative democracy?

i don't think it's thought as much as capacity for it that changes one's values. for instance, aontogeny recapitulating phylogeny: would you think it wise to have @TsviBT¹⁹⁹⁹ align contemporary Tsvi based on his values? How about vice versa?

In which way would the infection-resistant body or the lightcone destiny-setting world government pose limits to evolution via variation and selection?

To me it seems that the alternative can only ever be homeostasis - of the radical, lukewarm-helium-ion-soup kind.

When I say: 

You state Pythia mind experiment. And then react to it

I imply that in doing so you are citing Land.

er - this defeats all rules of conversational pragmatics but look, i concede if it stops further more preposterous rebuttals.

More importantly this is completely irrelevant to the substance of the discussion. My good faith doesn't depend in the slightest on whether you're citing Land or writing things yourself.

of course it doesn't. my opinion on your good faith depends on whether you are able to admit having  deeply misunderstood the post.

saying something of substance: i did, in the post. id respond to object-level criticism if you provided some - i just see status-jousting, formal pedantry, and random fnords.

have you read The Obliqueness Thesis btw? as i mentioned above, that's a gloss on the same texts that you might find more accessible - per editor's note, i contributed this to help those who'd want to check the sources upon reading it, so im not really sure how writing my own arguments would help.

Look friend.

You said you understood from the beginning that the text in question was Land's.

In your first comment, though, you clearly show that not to be the case:

> I do not see how you are doing that. You state Pythia mind experiment. And then react to it: "You go girl!". I suppose both the description of the mind experiment and the reaction are faithful. But there is no actual engagement between orthogonality thesis and Land's ideas. 

This clearly marks me as the author, as separated from Land.

I find it hard to keep engaging under an assumption of good faith on these premises.

uh I see - I’ve put the editors note in blockquote; hope that helps at least to make its meta- character clearer (:

sure? that would blickauote 75% of the article 


perhaps I could block quote the editors note instead?

I stand corrected. What do you suggest? See other comment

My bad, I didn't check and was tricked by the timing. Sincere apoloigies.

How would you suggest the thing could be improved? (the TeX version in the PDF contains Nick Land only).

I was thinking perhaps to add a link to each XS item, but wasnt really looking forward to rehashing comments of what has probably been the nadir in r/acc / LW diplomatic relations

Load More