3 ms·

I respectfully disagree. The portion regarding the norms in EA communities argumentation habits is the most weighty part of the analysis. The EMH example is a

I respectfully disagree. The portion regarding the norms in EA communities argumentation habits is the most weighty part of the analysis. The EMH example is a supporting detail. The thesis is this: EA communities are prone to insularity, hubris, and fabulism covered with a paper thin veneer of logic. The insularity generally means their arguments have not been subjected to even trivial scrutiny from non-EA communities. As a result, their arguments should as a first approximation be given no more weight than the average Reddit thread. To be logically complete it would need to collect a variety of examples of hubris, fabulism, and insularity from EA arguments, which is left as an exercise to the reader. Rhetorical fallacies are important to understand if you’re going to call them out. “Ad hominem” means attacking the argument by attacking the person. Here I am attacking the general credibility of a community of people based on the example of one of their members’ arguments. This is common in communities that are devoted to radical honesty and radical transparency, particularly those that actually have to hold these norms in high stakes market scenarios. It is called “believability weighting.” For example, if the Norway Government Pension Fund historically provides poor logical arguments in their analysis of EU recessions, their arguments about EU recessions should be given less weight in the future. Believability weighting is not the same as ad hominem.

d0mine 3y ago
It looks gpt-generated. If you have good arguments to attack specific statements, methods, no need to attack people. Otherwise, it reminds me how tabacco / oil industry tries to discredit science (often successfully) by attacking individual scientists. I see the effort to discredit EA lately (and given that I read about EA almost exclusively on HN, It says something). I wonder why.
- throwaway9274 3y ago
  “It looks gpt-generated.” See, this is an example of a contentless ad hominem. Believability weighting is when you say, “Here’s proof this argument is bad. The community from which this argument originates makes these types of bad arguments frequently. Therefore we should believe that community less often.”
  - d0mine 3y ago
    EMH is the only relevant argument you made to support your claims. If you believe the community so bad, it should be easy for you to come up with at least couple dozen examples of "bad arguments."
    - throwaway9274 3y ago
      Happy to do the research for you. My consulting rate is $500/hr.
PaulHoule 3y ago
As I see it there is nothing "rational" about rationalism at all, it is just something like Scientology or the Unification Church constructed for modern conditions. Back in the 1950s L. Ron Hubbard was interested in enslaving large numbers of people to take their money and labor. By the late 1970s he was starting to regret it because he was now responsible for these people (one reason why slavery quit being economically viable.) Thus began David Miscavige's plan to bleed a few "whale" donors for all they are worth https://tonyortega.org/2021/12/23/insider-how-scientologys-ideal-org-scam-works-and-how-members-are-victimized-by-it/ https://tonyortega.org/2021/12/23/insider-how-scientologys-i... Inequality has increased, you can't get blood from a stone, there is no point in a mass movement, so the goal has got to be target a few trust fund kids and get a whole lot out of them. The Symbionese Liberation Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army almost got it right by kidnapping Patty Hearst except they chose a method of mind control that gets you immediately in trouble with the state. Today you would camp out at Oxford or Stanford and develop a small movement not because you really want a movement but you need a movement for the whales to be a part of. In fact you'd develop a network of movements so you can market test ideas and see what works most effectively. It is so ironic that this group first filters people for a lack of critical thinking skills, and then puts them through a crash course in rhetoric so they can quickly say things like "Ad Hominem!" and then stick like a pitbull. The best way to deal with them online is to snipe at them and not get caught in the tarpitting they'll try to trap you in.

d0mine 3y ago

It looks gpt-generated. If you have good arguments to attack specific statements, methods, no need to attack people. Otherwise, it reminds me how tabacco / oil industry tries to discredit science (often successfully) by attacking individual scientists. I see the effort to discredit EA lately (and given that I read about EA almost exclusively on HN, It says something). I wonder why.

throwaway9274 3y ago
“It looks gpt-generated.” See, this is an example of a contentless ad hominem. Believability weighting is when you say, “Here’s proof this argument is bad. The community from which this argument originates makes these types of bad arguments frequently. Therefore we should believe that community less often.”
- d0mine 3y ago
  EMH is the only relevant argument you made to support your claims. If you believe the community so bad, it should be easy for you to come up with at least couple dozen examples of "bad arguments."
  - throwaway9274 3y ago
    Happy to do the research for you. My consulting rate is $500/hr.

PaulHoule 3y ago

As I see it there is nothing "rational" about rationalism at all, it is just something like Scientology or the Unification Church constructed for modern conditions. Back in the 1950s L. Ron Hubbard was interested in enslaving large numbers of people to take their money and labor. By the late 1970s he was starting to regret it because he was now responsible for these people (one reason why slavery quit being economically viable.) Thus began David Miscavige's plan to bleed a few "whale" donors for all they are worth https://tonyortega.org/2021/12/23/insider-how-scientologys-ideal-org-scam-works-and-how-members-are-victimized-by-it/ https://tonyortega.org/2021/12/23/insider-how-scientologys-i... Inequality has increased, you can't get blood from a stone, there is no point in a mass movement, so the goal has got to be target a few trust fund kids and get a whole lot out of them. The Symbionese Liberation Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army almost got it right by kidnapping Patty Hearst except they chose a method of mind control that gets you immediately in trouble with the state. Today you would camp out at Oxford or Stanford and develop a small movement not because you really want a movement but you need a movement for the whales to be a part of. In fact you'd develop a network of movements so you can market test ideas and see what works most effectively. It is so ironic that this group first filters people for a lack of critical thinking skills, and then puts them through a crash course in rhetoric so they can quickly say things like "Ad Hominem!" and then stick like a pitbull. The best way to deal with them online is to snipe at them and not get caught in the tarpitting they'll try to trap you in.