3 ms·

> I'm not arrogant enough to have a strong opinion either way > ...you start broadly ascribing motivations to an entire field... Do you see a contradiction? Yo

by upquark 11y ago

> I'm not arrogant enough to have a strong opinion either way > ...you start broadly ascribing motivations to an entire field... Do you see a contradiction? You're broadly calling a bunch of people "arrogant", who may have a very well informed and valid opinion on a topic.

dasil003 11y ago
Uh, I'm saying it's arrogant to be self-assured about the nature of consciousness, I'm directly addressing a specific line of thinking. That is very different from ascribing psychological motivations to a swath of people who almost certainly have a wide variety of motivations.
- upquark 11y ago
  You're making a broad statement about a bunch of people without knowing what they know or don't, and one might say that statement is insulting. Right after that, you're criticizing a guy for making blanket statements about a bunch of people. Saying "I'm not arrogant enough to have a strong opinion either way" about any statement A is itself a pretty arrogant thing to say (you are making a statement about the collective knowledge of everyone else on the topic of A not being too far from yours).
  - dasil003 11y ago
    I'm not saying anything about a group of people, I'm saying something about a specific belief. For those two things to be equivalent, there needs to be a layer of indirection, eg. if I were to say: "people who claim to know the nature of consciousness are doing so because they aren't comfortable with the idea of not knowing something"—that would be an equivalently arrogant statement. As it is, my statement is definitely not in that league. Do you not see the difference?
    - upquark 11y ago
      Hmm, let me see how I can explain this more clearly. "I'm not arrogant enough to do X" implies "Those who do X are sufficiently arrogant". Do you follow this far? Here's an example relating to your experience. I could claim: "I'm not arrogant enough to use RoR for serious web development". On the surface, I'm making a claim about myself / my beliefs. You shouldn't feel upset over my statement, it's not about you or any other people...
      - dasil003 11y ago
        I find the pastime of trying to pin somebody as a hypocrite on the internet as a loathsome and destitute form of debate that has become all too common. But you're still not getting it, if you actually went back and read my replies and attempted to understand them maybe you would see, but you don't seem to have any interest in specifics, only in generalization. Still, I'll feed your troll on more time. > Here's an example relating to your experience. I could claim: "I'm not arrogant enough to use RoR for serious web development". > On the surface, I'm making a claim about myself / my beliefs. You shouldn't feel upset over my statement, it's not about you or any other people... This is a fallacy to assume that just because I am attacking an idea, that no one will be offended. Of course someone can be offended if they have a belief that I think is arrogant, that is not in question, it's a phenomenal strawman you've set up there. Also, it's absurd to equate the belief that it's arrogant to use some mundane tool to the belief that the nature of consciousness is outside the bounds of human knowledge. Is it the case that you are fully aware of the nature of consciousness, and I'm just an ignoramus who is clueless about the state of human knowledge? Okay, enlighten me then, I'm open to arguments about the nature of consciousness and why we be certain about it. Your assertion boils down to the idea that it's arrogant to believe that any belief somebody else holds is itself arrogant, regardless of how preposterous that belief may be. Fine, you got me, go get yourself a cookie.

by upquark 11y ago

dasil003 11y ago

Uh, I'm saying it's arrogant to be self-assured about the nature of consciousness, I'm directly addressing a specific line of thinking. That is very different from ascribing psychological motivations to a swath of people who almost certainly have a wide variety of motivations.

upquark 11y ago
You're making a broad statement about a bunch of people without knowing what they know or don't, and one might say that statement is insulting. Right after that, you're criticizing a guy for making blanket statements about a bunch of people. Saying "I'm not arrogant enough to have a strong opinion either way" about any statement A is itself a pretty arrogant thing to say (you are making a statement about the collective knowledge of everyone else on the topic of A not being too far from yours).
- dasil003 11y ago
  I'm not saying anything about a group of people, I'm saying something about a specific belief. For those two things to be equivalent, there needs to be a layer of indirection, eg. if I were to say: "people who claim to know the nature of consciousness are doing so because they aren't comfortable with the idea of not knowing something"—that would be an equivalently arrogant statement. As it is, my statement is definitely not in that league. Do you not see the difference?
  - upquark 11y ago
    Hmm, let me see how I can explain this more clearly. "I'm not arrogant enough to do X" implies "Those who do X are sufficiently arrogant". Do you follow this far? Here's an example relating to your experience. I could claim: "I'm not arrogant enough to use RoR for serious web development". On the surface, I'm making a claim about myself / my beliefs. You shouldn't feel upset over my statement, it's not about you or any other people...
    - dasil003 11y ago
      I find the pastime of trying to pin somebody as a hypocrite on the internet as a loathsome and destitute form of debate that has become all too common. But you're still not getting it, if you actually went back and read my replies and attempted to understand them maybe you would see, but you don't seem to have any interest in specifics, only in generalization. Still, I'll feed your troll on more time. > Here's an example relating to your experience. I could claim: "I'm not arrogant enough to use RoR for serious web development". > On the surface, I'm making a claim about myself / my beliefs. You shouldn't feel upset over my statement, it's not about you or any other people... This is a fallacy to assume that just because I am attacking an idea, that no one will be offended. Of course someone can be offended if they have a belief that I think is arrogant, that is not in question, it's a phenomenal strawman you've set up there. Also, it's absurd to equate the belief that it's arrogant to use some mundane tool to the belief that the nature of consciousness is outside the bounds of human knowledge. Is it the case that you are fully aware of the nature of consciousness, and I'm just an ignoramus who is clueless about the state of human knowledge? Okay, enlighten me then, I'm open to arguments about the nature of consciousness and why we be certain about it. Your assertion boils down to the idea that it's arrogant to believe that any belief somebody else holds is itself arrogant, regardless of how preposterous that belief may be. Fine, you got me, go get yourself a cookie.