5 ms·

This seems to be a fallacy as it can be applied to anything. Here's an example illustrating how bad of an argument that is: It appears to be reasonable to ass

by Garlef 4y ago

This seems to be a fallacy as it can be applied to anything. Here's an example illustrating how bad of an argument that is: It appears to be reasonable to assign the "your mother is a [insert derogatory term]" hypothesis a higher prior, in Bayesian terms, just based on the many familiy members whose image/status would it directly or indirectly damage if found true (your dad, your uncle, your sister, your grandparents), and which therefore would be compelled to paint it as unlikely.

dxuh 4y ago
I fully agree with your point, but I think the example is a bit aggressive towards OP. I'm sure you got a good chuckle of out of this, but I think it would have been better to give an example that did not seem like an attack. For example the earth being flat, the moon landing being fake or something like that.
- Garlef 4y ago
  Agreed. Also, I'm not happy that I used and reproduced negative connotations about prostitution (that are deeply rooted in patriarchical control of female sexuality and reproduction). But I choose to keep this non-insult since it has a very strong impact in just a few words due to the high cognitive dissonance it causes. (Partly responsible for the chuckle you mentioned). The earth being flat is not a good substitute btw since it's also in the topos of conspiracy theories thus reducing the cognitive dissonance. But I'd be happy for other suggestions.
  - swores 4y ago
    "a mass murderer" would work well
goblin89 4y ago
Your analogy is harmful to the topic under discussion: its key assumptions (such as comparing the governments of US and China to my family in terms of power and influence) render it inapplicable. > It appears to be reasonable to assign the "your mother is a [insert derogatory term]" hypothesis a higher prior, in Bayesian terms, just based on the many familiy members whose image/status would it directly or indirectly damage if found true (your dad, your uncle, your sister, your grandparents), and which therefore would be compelled to paint it as unlikely. If something major happened that made it a difficult binary choice between either that and <insert an alternative>, then certainly it would be reasonable to assign appropriate priors if you were forming your opinion exclusively by interviewing my relatives. (On the other hand, if my family members or relatives were in positions of significant power/esteem/status that they stood to lose if what you say were true, had significant social influence and a degree of control over mass media, then reweighing priors in such fashion would be advisable regardless of your source.)
- Garlef 4y ago
  > comparing the governments of US and China to my family Hi there. My intention was not to make this about your literal family. The "your" was intended to refer to a general addressee. Sry for that.
  - goblin89 4y ago
    I was not offended. I concede to arguments raised by other repliers regarding my misuse (or at least very unorthodox use) of the term “prior”, but still find an objection based on your analogy ill-founded. Your analogy more or less supports my point (which I, to be fair, expressed badly).

by Garlef 4y ago

dxuh 4y ago

I fully agree with your point, but I think the example is a bit aggressive towards OP. I'm sure you got a good chuckle of out of this, but I think it would have been better to give an example that did not seem like an attack. For example the earth being flat, the moon landing being fake or something like that.

Garlef 4y ago
Agreed. Also, I'm not happy that I used and reproduced negative connotations about prostitution (that are deeply rooted in patriarchical control of female sexuality and reproduction). But I choose to keep this non-insult since it has a very strong impact in just a few words due to the high cognitive dissonance it causes. (Partly responsible for the chuckle you mentioned). The earth being flat is not a good substitute btw since it's also in the topos of conspiracy theories thus reducing the cognitive dissonance. But I'd be happy for other suggestions.
- swores 4y ago
  "a mass murderer" would work well

goblin89 4y ago

Your analogy is harmful to the topic under discussion: its key assumptions (such as comparing the governments of US and China to my family in terms of power and influence) render it inapplicable. > It appears to be reasonable to assign the "your mother is a [insert derogatory term]" hypothesis a higher prior, in Bayesian terms, just based on the many familiy members whose image/status would it directly or indirectly damage if found true (your dad, your uncle, your sister, your grandparents), and which therefore would be compelled to paint it as unlikely. If something major happened that made it a difficult binary choice between either that and <insert an alternative>, then certainly it would be reasonable to assign appropriate priors if you were forming your opinion exclusively by interviewing my relatives. (On the other hand, if my family members or relatives were in positions of significant power/esteem/status that they stood to lose if what you say were true, had significant social influence and a degree of control over mass media, then reweighing priors in such fashion would be advisable regardless of your source.)

Garlef 4y ago
> comparing the governments of US and China to my family Hi there. My intention was not to make this about your literal family. The "your" was intended to refer to a general addressee. Sry for that.
- goblin89 4y ago
  I was not offended. I concede to arguments raised by other repliers regarding my misuse (or at least very unorthodox use) of the term “prior”, but still find an objection based on your analogy ill-founded. Your analogy more or less supports my point (which I, to be fair, expressed badly).