This should be an acceptable hypothesis to the LW population. c.f. “I’m considering getting my facial expressions analysed, so I’ll know what I’m thinking”.
Jokes aside, I think that’s a great idea. I’ve often wished to have extra eyes and ears on my hands, in addition to the ones on my head, so I can perceive more things, in particular about myself.
Two behaviorists are having sex. When they are done, one of them turns to the other and says “well, that was good for you, how was it for me?”
Moldbug is a high verbal demagogue. He’s not actually interested in truth-seeking (for instance by engaging with critics). He’s too cool for critics. The problem with the mini-cults that this type of demagogue establishes is that occasionally they grow up and kill a lot of people.
I advocate a “conciseness/clarity” status marker for smarts, not obscurantism or demagoguery.
Real argument is when you use “data.” Real truth-seeking is when you engage with your critics. Real communication is when you try to be concise and clear. Does Moldbug do any of this? He tries to be persuasive, but not by any of these means.
Your attempt to be persuasive so far consisted of a status attack. Is that a trick you learned from Moldbug? Moldbug said of Scott Alexander:
“Again, the constant embarrassment of life in Pontus is that you wish for better critics than you have. I really ought to give this thing [anti-reactionary FAQ] the thorough reaming it deserves. But in general, it’s not bad enough to be funny and not good enough to be interesting. I’m a busy guy and my motivation does flag.”
Voted up because even though this is outrageous if meant seriously, it’s a very succinct statement of the point of view.
Idea from a very valuable essay—the specific content is just ordinary good, but the idea that people generally believe everyone else is deluded is worth hanging on to.
You need to read Moldbugg to find out what Progressives think. Querying your own mind won’t work because PROGRESSIVES LIE TO THEMSELVES!!!
This should be an acceptable hypothesis to the LW population. c.f. “I’m considering getting my facial expressions analysed, so I’ll know what I’m thinking”.
Jokes aside, I think that’s a great idea. I’ve often wished to have extra eyes and ears on my hands, in addition to the ones on my head, so I can perceive more things, in particular about myself.
Two behaviorists are having sex. When they are done, one of them turns to the other and says “well, that was good for you, how was it for me?”
Moldbug is a high verbal demagogue. He’s not actually interested in truth-seeking (for instance by engaging with critics). He’s too cool for critics. The problem with the mini-cults that this type of demagogue establishes is that occasionally they grow up and kill a lot of people.
I advocate a “conciseness/clarity” status marker for smarts, not obscurantism or demagoguery.
Um, do you even know what the word “demagogue” means?
Real argument is when you use “data.” Real truth-seeking is when you engage with your critics. Real communication is when you try to be concise and clear. Does Moldbug do any of this? He tries to be persuasive, but not by any of these means.
Your attempt to be persuasive so far consisted of a status attack. Is that a trick you learned from Moldbug? Moldbug said of Scott Alexander:
“Again, the constant embarrassment of life in Pontus is that you wish for better critics than you have. I really ought to give this thing [anti-reactionary FAQ] the thorough reaming it deserves. But in general, it’s not bad enough to be funny and not good enough to be interesting. I’m a busy guy and my motivation does flag.”
Content-free status attack.
This post has served its purpose and is not needed any more.
Done, thanks.
The core of neoreaction is a different value system. There is no truth in values, so I’m not sure what kind of truth-seeking do you have in mind.
Voted up because even though this is outrageous if meant seriously, it’s a very succinct statement of the point of view.
Idea from a very valuable essay—the specific content is just ordinary good, but the idea that people generally believe everyone else is deluded is worth hanging on to.