4 ms·
> Who among us couldn't guess what the NYT's take is going to be in a mormon leader's obituary before they write it? [sheepishly] raises hand
by erikpukinskis 7y ago
> Who among us couldn't guess what the NYT's take is going to be in a mormon leader's obituary before they write it?
[sheepishly] raises hand
- justin66 7y agoI had the same thought. I'm a NYT subscriber and while I'm not always the most careful reader, it doesn't seem to me the paper covers Mormons who are not Mitt Romney nearly often enough for there to be a stereotypical take
- invalidOrTaken 7y agoOne can be extrapolated with eigenmorality though! https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1820 https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1820
- justin66 7y agoI'm grimly curious as to whether or not you really think I'm going to read all that.
- iron0013 7y agoThis is the perfect and always perfectly accurate response whenever someone links to the Rational-sphere. On the other hand, why use few words when you could use—Jesus Christ—6,663 words instead?
- knzhou 7y agoYou mean this idea? > A moral person is someone who cooperates with other moral people, and who refuses to cooperate with immoral people. It's just so naive. A slightly cleaned up version of ordinary tribalism: "we are good and they are bad", with no further justification. Anybody can claim their own tribe is the moral one this way.
- invalidOrTaken 7y agoOh, I certainly agree. But a naive algorithm can be used to predict the opinions of the naive.
- knzhou 7y agoAh, sorry, I misunderstood you. I was mostly reacting because I remember reading that blog post when it came out and thinking it was a neat idea, and now I'm recoiling in horror at how terrible it sounds.
- saagarjha 7y agoThe article actually discusses this very argument, though in a slightly tangential way.