Although it’s perfectly reasonable not to want to sign up for cryonics (and I haven’t signed up myself)
Would you please explain your rationale?
“Rationalist” here is used to mean “exposed to rationalist ideas”, not “is a rationalist person”. I realize that’s confusing but I don’t have better terminology.
I understood, and then used, “rationalist” to mean “accurate map of the territory”. I’d agree exposure to LW helps eliminate some biases and, in that way, it is rationalist training that improves one’s rationality. I’m not yet willing to say Less Wrong = More Right in every case, however.
Maybe more time on LW leads to improved rationality… up to the point where it doesn’t? I find the dogmatic-ish acceptance of certain ideas around here reminds me of religion. It is funny to me you used that example...
I find the dogmatic-ish acceptance of certain ideas around here reminds me of religion
Did you actually look at the statistics? Whatever dogma you’re seeing isn’t there. It’s more likely you’re thinking some people you’ve had discussions with here are more representative of LW than they actually are.
As in the church, it isn’t too terribly important to dogma that it has widespread acceptance among adherents to a particular faith in order to be dogma.
What is far more important to establishing dogma is having de facto authority and/or status leaders accept it and voice their support.
I suppose this happens in the way you note. I don’t advocate labeling LW, or anyone else, a religion. I just meant to say certain aspects remind me of religion. Other aspects are nothing like religion.
I don’t think cryonics is impossible. In fact, I’m probably in the proto-rationalist group that doesn’t really understand the science but thinks it has a high probability of working someday. I just don’t understand why it is so appealing.
The dogma seems to be more that “cryonics and the option for indefinite life extension is good” more than “cryonics is possible”.
Would you please explain your rationale?
I understood, and then used, “rationalist” to mean “accurate map of the territory”. I’d agree exposure to LW helps eliminate some biases and, in that way, it is rationalist training that improves one’s rationality. I’m not yet willing to say Less Wrong = More Right in every case, however.
Maybe more time on LW leads to improved rationality… up to the point where it doesn’t? I find the dogmatic-ish acceptance of certain ideas around here reminds me of religion. It is funny to me you used that example...
Did you actually look at the statistics? Whatever dogma you’re seeing isn’t there. It’s more likely you’re thinking some people you’ve had discussions with here are more representative of LW than they actually are.
As in the church, it isn’t too terribly important to dogma that it has widespread acceptance among adherents to a particular faith in order to be dogma.
What is far more important to establishing dogma is having de facto authority and/or status leaders accept it and voice their support.
Doesn’t this apply to any system where power is tilted and the high status members have ideologies? Should we call them all religions?
I suppose this happens in the way you note. I don’t advocate labeling LW, or anyone else, a religion. I just meant to say certain aspects remind me of religion. Other aspects are nothing like religion.
I don’t think cryonics is impossible. In fact, I’m probably in the proto-rationalist group that doesn’t really understand the science but thinks it has a high probability of working someday. I just don’t understand why it is so appealing.
The dogma seems to be more that “cryonics and the option for indefinite life extension is good” more than “cryonics is possible”.
It may not be a religion but it sure as anything embraces a particular mythology.