4 ms·

> Do you really think the post boiled down to just "an unproductive politics mudsling"? No, but I think the discussion on HN is likely to devolve into that. Th

> Do you really think the post boiled down to just "an unproductive politics mudsling"? No, but I think the discussion on HN is likely to devolve into that. There's a reason politics articles are more or less banned here. I know it's your own site you're promoting so it makes sense to just submit wherever, but you're talking about politics, economics, egalatarianism, regulation, socialism, healthcare, bailouts, environmental atrocities - this is all crammed into one post. No one who sees your post is going to get convinced one way or another - people who were sympathetic are going to remain sympathetic, people who were hostile are going to remain hostile. That's we try to stay away from politics here.

karjaluoto 16y ago
Funny part is that the variety of posts here is what keeps me checking into HN on a daily basis. I started reading HN when we were working on "web startup stuff," but have continued to because it exposes me to novel arguments, thinking, and standpoints that I might not have been exposed to otherwise. The reason that I link to my posts here (and this is one of the very few places I do) is to bring them to another audience (generally designers frequent ideasonideas more than anyone else), and to try and open up new discussions and access varied opinions. If I'm out of line in posting this sort of thing here, please do feel free to say so, and vote it down. That being said, I wouldn't have made note of it, if I didn't think the topic was worthy of exploration and discussion. I will argue your last point, though. The notion that, "people who were sympathetic are going to remain sympathetic, people who were hostile are going to remain hostile." I'm one of those people who would have once taken a completely different standpoint on such an issue. With time, though, as I've been exposed to others thoughts on the topic, it has become harder to hold on to those ideas. It's the fact that people kept "bugging me" with these sorts of discussions that forced me to reconsider my positions. It seems to me that the HN community is one that needs to talk about these sorts of things, just as much as funding, coding, success, and all the rest. These issues are going to become increasingly important in both our lives and careers.
macrael 16y ago
Why do you think that is? Why is it so hard to discuss these things in a meaningful way. We all like to think we are reasonable people, that we are open to having our minds changed, and yet it does seem to be impossible to talk about big ideas in any setting other than a dialogue between friends.
- crystalis 16y ago
  There's a good set of articles available at http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Politics_is_the_Mind-Killer http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Politics_is_the_Mind-Killer on the topic. http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Arguments_as_soldiers http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Arguments_as_soldiers is also often relevant. edit: I don't know if I was downvoted for seeming spammy, but Eliezer's writings actually cover the topic pretty well.
  - karjaluoto 16y ago
    Thanks for the links to the wiki--I'll take a closer look at them on my bus ride home. (This afternoon got a little hectic, and I wasn't able to give them a look yet.)
- karjaluoto 16y ago
  I don't really know. To me, it's always seemed that the best, and most interesting, discussions are the ones with some "meat" to them. My wife's uncle was a very loud man. He was also well read and intelligent. I didn't agree with him on everything, but greatly enjoyed our discussions (particularly the ones accompanied by good scotch). His sons later recounted a phrase he had used commonly. I paraphrase, but it was something akin to: "Argue with the person across the table as though you love them." I'm butchering the phrasing here, but I believe the sentiment holds. To Terry, a heated debate was a positive thing, and never an attack--no matter how fierce the discussion became. I've always liked that thinking, and believe it's the way we actually learn new things and strengthen our resolve on what we believe.
  - loup-vaillant 16y ago

karjaluoto 16y ago

Funny part is that the variety of posts here is what keeps me checking into HN on a daily basis. I started reading HN when we were working on "web startup stuff," but have continued to because it exposes me to novel arguments, thinking, and standpoints that I might not have been exposed to otherwise. The reason that I link to my posts here (and this is one of the very few places I do) is to bring them to another audience (generally designers frequent ideasonideas more than anyone else), and to try and open up new discussions and access varied opinions. If I'm out of line in posting this sort of thing here, please do feel free to say so, and vote it down. That being said, I wouldn't have made note of it, if I didn't think the topic was worthy of exploration and discussion. I will argue your last point, though. The notion that, "people who were sympathetic are going to remain sympathetic, people who were hostile are going to remain hostile." I'm one of those people who would have once taken a completely different standpoint on such an issue. With time, though, as I've been exposed to others thoughts on the topic, it has become harder to hold on to those ideas. It's the fact that people kept "bugging me" with these sorts of discussions that forced me to reconsider my positions. It seems to me that the HN community is one that needs to talk about these sorts of things, just as much as funding, coding, success, and all the rest. These issues are going to become increasingly important in both our lives and careers.

macrael 16y ago

Why do you think that is? Why is it so hard to discuss these things in a meaningful way. We all like to think we are reasonable people, that we are open to having our minds changed, and yet it does seem to be impossible to talk about big ideas in any setting other than a dialogue between friends.

crystalis 16y ago
There's a good set of articles available at http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Politics_is_the_Mind-Killer http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Politics_is_the_Mind-Killer on the topic. http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Arguments_as_soldiers http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Arguments_as_soldiers is also often relevant. edit: I don't know if I was downvoted for seeming spammy, but Eliezer's writings actually cover the topic pretty well.
- karjaluoto 16y ago
  Thanks for the links to the wiki--I'll take a closer look at them on my bus ride home. (This afternoon got a little hectic, and I wasn't able to give them a look yet.)
karjaluoto 16y ago
I don't really know. To me, it's always seemed that the best, and most interesting, discussions are the ones with some "meat" to them. My wife's uncle was a very loud man. He was also well read and intelligent. I didn't agree with him on everything, but greatly enjoyed our discussions (particularly the ones accompanied by good scotch). His sons later recounted a phrase he had used commonly. I paraphrase, but it was something akin to: "Argue with the person across the table as though you love them." I'm butchering the phrasing here, but I believe the sentiment holds. To Terry, a heated debate was a positive thing, and never an attack--no matter how fierce the discussion became. I've always liked that thinking, and believe it's the way we actually learn new things and strengthen our resolve on what we believe.
- loup-vaillant 16y ago