I liked it, it’s always good to have an example, it makes reading more pleasant, and it helps to update with the info (not to understand what you are saying, but to propagate the new knowledge into your belief network). Or at least it does to me.
I entirely agree with this, but am writing a comment in addition to an upvote of the above just to make my appreciation towards Kaj for the Dr. Zany thing more salient to him.
Liked it, but thought there was a bit too much of it (e.g. the blue-minimizing robot reference). Might be better to leave out details that don’t help you illustrate your point, lest the reader get a sense that your example isn’t going anywhere.
Check. It was a good idea, but could’ve and should’ve been shortened. I skimmed it, and my guess is that it could’ve been set up in one or two paragraphs if only the minimum of required detail had been included.
I disagree that there were too many extraneous details about Dr. Zany in this post. They didn’t detract from the value of the post and, at least, the blue-minimizing robot reference was funny.
I found it awkward and weird, especially the bits with the assistant. But it looks like you and some readers had fun, so I don’t mind if you keep doing it.
Somewhat more interesting. I’m not sure about the brain in a vat threat—I’m pulled between “that’s really creepy if it’s read literally—is she trapped there?” and the tone of “this is lightweight humor, you’re supposed to read it with most of your empathy turned off”.
“this is lightweight humor, you’re supposed to read it with most of your empathy turned off”
Ever since reading The Sword of Good, I’ve lost the ability to do that. Not that I was ever great at it. I wonder if that’s happened to anyone else. /irrelevant tangent
(On the other hand, the female assistant set off some gender-stereotypes-icky warning bells in me. Despite your obvious attempts at avoiding this. I’m probably just projecting some unfavourable impressions of the source material on your adaptation, but you may still want to be aware of this possibility.)
Oddly, I made the assistant female partially because having a mad scientist with a male assistant (Igor fetch brains, master...) felt too stereotypical.
I also considered making Dr. Zany himself female, but there the character felt so strongly male that my brain just wouldn’t go along with it.
Strongly agreed. That aspect also seemed bad because the assistant being labeled like a robot while funny sounded almost like some form of symbolic objectification. And the fact that her main talent she’s valued for is the ability to make sandwiches rather than say help tweak the ray guns or Tesla coils strongly didn’t help matters.
But note that her being valued mostly for the sandwiches says more about Dr. Zany’s attitude than about how things really are, and she’s strongly implied to be the more competent of the two...
Stories are a huge way we make sense of the world. Adding a narrative sequence to the post did helped me keep track of the ideas and how they fit together.
Worked great for me. I like to browse the articles during coffee breaks, and anything that helps me to easily grab on to an idea through example in “reality” rather than slow down and parse out the abstract concepts in my head makes the read go altogether easier :)
I like stories illustrating facts but I think that their usefulness is inversely proportional to the technical complexity (and maybe inferential distance) of the writing. So here it wasn’t a problem but it probably wouldn’t make much difference if you skipped it.
Datapoint: I skim-read the article today. I am interested in the overal thesis [need for closureness, counterfactual modelling etc]. I skipped the Dr. Zany story.
So, feedback requested on the Dr. Zany thing. Made an otherwise dry post more interesting to read, or pointless and distracting?
I liked it, it’s always good to have an example, it makes reading more pleasant, and it helps to update with the info (not to understand what you are saying, but to propagate the new knowledge into your belief network). Or at least it does to me.
I entirely agree with this, but am writing a comment in addition to an upvote of the above just to make my appreciation towards Kaj for the Dr. Zany thing more salient to him.
It worked. Thanks. :-)
Liked it, but thought there was a bit too much of it (e.g. the blue-minimizing robot reference). Might be better to leave out details that don’t help you illustrate your point, lest the reader get a sense that your example isn’t going anywhere.
Check. It was a good idea, but could’ve and should’ve been shortened. I skimmed it, and my guess is that it could’ve been set up in one or two paragraphs if only the minimum of required detail had been included.
I disagree that there were too many extraneous details about Dr. Zany in this post. They didn’t detract from the value of the post and, at least, the blue-minimizing robot reference was funny.
brain balks at “mutability”, stumbles over “antecedent”, sprains ankle on “counterfactual”
Oh, I get it! Brain jumps up and down with glee.
I found it helpful and entertaining.
Well, it did make me more likely to accept your theory. After all...
“More fine-grained scenarios offer an opportunity to tell more detailed stories, and humans give disproportionate weight to detailed stories.”
Would not have gotten through the post without it.
Made the post more interesting to read.
It was good, but mostly because it provided some nice examples.
I found it awkward and weird, especially the bits with the assistant. But it looks like you and some readers had fun, so I don’t mind if you keep doing it.
Made it more interesting, to me at least. I probably wouldn’t have had the focus to get through the article otherwise.
It was cute, particularly the conclusion.
Annoying, at least for me.
Somewhat more interesting. I’m not sure about the brain in a vat threat—I’m pulled between “that’s really creepy if it’s read literally—is she trapped there?” and the tone of “this is lightweight humor, you’re supposed to read it with most of your empathy turned off”.
Ever since reading The Sword of Good, I’ve lost the ability to do that. Not that I was ever great at it. I wonder if that’s happened to anyone else. /irrelevant tangent
Spoiler alert: People who’ve seen the movie Silent Hill might enjoy this comment. Vg jnf jrveq ubj n fznyy er-nffrffzrag bs gur cerzvfrf bs gur svyz znqr zr tb sebz “lrnuuuuu tb Fngna, xvyy nyy gubfr ovtbgrq Puevfgvna fgnaq-vaf!” gb “bu zl Tbq V jnf whfg purrevat nf gur qrivy znffnperq n ohapu bs cngurgvp fpnerq puhepu crbcyr va fbzr tbqsbefnxra yvzob jbeyq, gung’f nobhg nf Rivy nf vg trgf, jul nz V fb sevttva’ vzcerffvbanoyr”.
This is hardly an original thought, but I wonder how much work this does in ethical thought experiments.
Worked. Good character. Do please use him again.
Slightly distracting, but worth it.
(On the other hand, the female assistant set off some gender-stereotypes-icky warning bells in me. Despite your obvious attempts at avoiding this. I’m probably just projecting some unfavourable impressions of the source material on your adaptation, but you may still want to be aware of this possibility.)
Oddly, I made the assistant female partially because having a mad scientist with a male assistant (Igor fetch brains, master...) felt too stereotypical.
I also considered making Dr. Zany himself female, but there the character felt so strongly male that my brain just wouldn’t go along with it.
Strongly agreed. That aspect also seemed bad because the assistant being labeled like a robot while funny sounded almost like some form of symbolic objectification. And the fact that her main talent she’s valued for is the ability to make sandwiches rather than say help tweak the ray guns or Tesla coils strongly didn’t help matters.
But note that her being valued mostly for the sandwiches says more about Dr. Zany’s attitude than about how things really are, and she’s strongly implied to be the more competent of the two...
Stories are a huge way we make sense of the world. Adding a narrative sequence to the post did helped me keep track of the ideas and how they fit together.
Worked great for me. I like to browse the articles during coffee breaks, and anything that helps me to easily grab on to an idea through example in “reality” rather than slow down and parse out the abstract concepts in my head makes the read go altogether easier :)
I like stories illustrating facts but I think that their usefulness is inversely proportional to the technical complexity (and maybe inferential distance) of the writing. So here it wasn’t a problem but it probably wouldn’t make much difference if you skipped it.
Definitely felt it made the article more attention grabbing and easier to follow.
Datapoint: I skim-read the article today. I am interested in the overal thesis [need for closureness, counterfactual modelling etc]. I skipped the Dr. Zany story.