5 ms·

Tell me about it. He's a smart dude and I can't help but appreciate his work. But his defense of racialism is getting harder and harder for me to ignore.

adolph 4y ago
> his defense of racialism ??
- superb-owl 4y ago
  I'd suggest reading the NY Times article on him [1], as well as his rebuttal [2] I don't think the Times was entirely fair in their coverage. But as a long time SSC/ACX reader I've often felt a subtext of racialist beliefs lurking in the corner. He never comes right out and says it, but e.g. praising Charles Murray is more than a dog whistle. To be clear - I'm distinguishing racialism (which believes there are large, measurable, genetic differences in traits like intelligence and aggression between races) and racism (which carries an extra connotation of emotional hatred). I think of racialism as racism masquerading as objective science. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/technology/slate-star-codex-rationalists.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/technology/slate-star-cod... [2] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/statement-on-new-york-times-article https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/statement-on-new-york-...
  - mistermann 4y ago
    Do you strongly distinguish between race and culture?
    - superb-owl 4y ago
      I'm not entirely sure I understand the question... But yes - in my set of definitions, race is genetic/hardware, and culture is environmental/software. Obviously the two correlate pretty heavily - i.e. racial groups tend to form subcultures.
      - mistermann 4y ago
        Does culture not vastly complicate the racism question, perhaps often to a point beyond the human mind's ability to conceptualize it accurately, especially considering how flawed we know it is at that task?
        superb-owl 4y ago
        I mean, sure, it's complicated. Are you saying complicated things aren't worth studying or discussing? Quantum mechanics is also "beyond the human mind's ability to conceptualize" but we're still able to make progress. And discussions of race are vastly more important, at least when measuring in terms of human suffering.
        mistermann 4y ago
        I'm more so saying that your mind presents to you a representation of reality, and if you take this representation at face value, you may have an inaccurate model. I don't know you personally, but "most" people I encounter seem to draw no distinction between their model of reality and reality itself. Consider: > praising Charles Murray is more than a dog whistle. What is the meaning of "is" (to be) in this context, in a literal/architectural sense? Does your "is" align with other people's? And where this a discrepancy, how skeptical of your take on it are you? Possibly related: https://i.redd.it/nbqixw27k5vy.jpg https://i.redd.it/nbqixw27k5vy.jpg
  - adolph 4y ago
    Was that the one that doxxed him? [Edit:] Yes, yes it was the smear that doxed him and misrepresented his writings in an egregious manner. I had forgotten about that incident, but F the NYT and anyone repeating Cade Metz' lies. In early 2020, I learned the New York Times wanted to write an article about me. They had discovered my real name and wanted to reveal it to the world.
  - bawolff 4y ago
    I'm not really familar with SSC's writing, and the NYT article is paywalled. For that matter i had not heard of Chris Murray either. But it seems really unfair to infer that someone believes X because he praised someone who believes X, especially without further context.

adolph 4y ago

> his defense of racialism ??

superb-owl 4y ago
I'd suggest reading the NY Times article on him [1], as well as his rebuttal [2] I don't think the Times was entirely fair in their coverage. But as a long time SSC/ACX reader I've often felt a subtext of racialist beliefs lurking in the corner. He never comes right out and says it, but e.g. praising Charles Murray is more than a dog whistle. To be clear - I'm distinguishing racialism (which believes there are large, measurable, genetic differences in traits like intelligence and aggression between races) and racism (which carries an extra connotation of emotional hatred). I think of racialism as racism masquerading as objective science. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/technology/slate-star-codex-rationalists.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/technology/slate-star-cod... [2] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/statement-on-new-york-times-article https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/statement-on-new-york-...
- mistermann 4y ago
  Do you strongly distinguish between race and culture?
  - superb-owl 4y ago
    I'm not entirely sure I understand the question... But yes - in my set of definitions, race is genetic/hardware, and culture is environmental/software. Obviously the two correlate pretty heavily - i.e. racial groups tend to form subcultures.
    - mistermann 4y ago
      Does culture not vastly complicate the racism question, perhaps often to a point beyond the human mind's ability to conceptualize it accurately, especially considering how flawed we know it is at that task?
      - superb-owl 4y ago
        I mean, sure, it's complicated. Are you saying complicated things aren't worth studying or discussing? Quantum mechanics is also "beyond the human mind's ability to conceptualize" but we're still able to make progress. And discussions of race are vastly more important, at least when measuring in terms of human suffering.
        mistermann 4y ago
        I'm more so saying that your mind presents to you a representation of reality, and if you take this representation at face value, you may have an inaccurate model. I don't know you personally, but "most" people I encounter seem to draw no distinction between their model of reality and reality itself. Consider: > praising Charles Murray is more than a dog whistle. What is the meaning of "is" (to be) in this context, in a literal/architectural sense? Does your "is" align with other people's? And where this a discrepancy, how skeptical of your take on it are you? Possibly related: https://i.redd.it/nbqixw27k5vy.jpg https://i.redd.it/nbqixw27k5vy.jpg
- adolph 4y ago
  Was that the one that doxxed him? [Edit:] Yes, yes it was the smear that doxed him and misrepresented his writings in an egregious manner. I had forgotten about that incident, but F the NYT and anyone repeating Cade Metz' lies. In early 2020, I learned the New York Times wanted to write an article about me. They had discovered my real name and wanted to reveal it to the world.
- bawolff 4y ago
  I'm not really familar with SSC's writing, and the NYT article is paywalled. For that matter i had not heard of Chris Murray either. But it seems really unfair to infer that someone believes X because he praised someone who believes X, especially without further context.