3 ms·
Both of these reviews bring up the matter of irrational responses, in the form of what Aaronson calls 'hostile mistranslation', the willful misinterpretation of
by mannykannot 9y ago
Both of these reviews bring up the matter of irrational responses, in the form of what Aaronson calls 'hostile mistranslation', the willful misinterpretation of the work in order to build whatever straw man the reviewer wants to attack.
- thraway180306 9y agoThis matter being itself a cliche in these circles. Rationalist forums are full of denouncing uncharitable critics who intentionally misunderstand what is obviously innocuous and infallible if you would just understand (presumably by god-given charity). I think this knee-jerk reaction is itself irrational. In the above review for example the reviewer builds a straw-man that the critics are anti-science. Calling out religious features of arguments bordering on scientism (it does even have a church!) is not denouncing scientific method.
- jfaucett 9y agoYes. I think we've all experienced and been perpetrators of this. Its so base and natural to want to maintain your own viewpoints that everyone does this naturally. The way I try to get around it for myself is actually imagine I am that person and seeing the world through their eyes. This does give you a very bad emotional feeling that you have to fight against, but it does help, it especially gives you better prodding questions that are genuinely for understanding and not malicious.