Conversely, we could skip the listing of traits and the construction of ready-made responses that we could release uniformly and the misleading self-descriptions, and move directly to “What would be wrong with that, if we were?”
Anyone who can answer that question has successfully tabooed “cult” and we can now move on to discussing their actual concerns, which might even be legitimate ones.
Engaging on the topic further with anyone who can’t answer that question seems unlikely to be productive.
When you said that the problem with religions is that they tend to assign the probability of 1 to their priors, did you mean to include having some members who assign probability 1 to some priors in the category you were identifying as problematic?
It changed my preferred method of approach slightly; I skip the “Yeah we’re a cult” and go straight to the “So what?” It’s a simple method: answer with a question, dodge the idiocy.
Conversely, we could skip the listing of traits and the construction of ready-made responses that we could release uniformly and the misleading self-descriptions, and move directly to “What would be wrong with that, if we were?”
Anyone who can answer that question has successfully tabooed “cult” and we can now move on to discussing their actual concerns, which might even be legitimate ones.
Engaging on the topic further with anyone who can’t answer that question seems unlikely to be productive.
The problem with cults is that they tend to assign the probability of 1 to their priors.
Of course it’s a general problem with religions, but quoting Ambrose Bierce’s The Devil’s Dictionary from memory...
Religion, n. -- a large successful cult.
Cult, n. -- a small unsuccessful religion.
Well, one of LW’s dogmas seems to be that 0 and 1 are not probabilities, so...
Ah, but that’s just the sort of thing we’d want you to think we believe, to throw you off the scent!
Do we assign the probability of 1 to our priors?
LW regulars are a diverse bunch. Though I have no evidence I am pretty sure some assign the probability of 1 to some priors.
Yes, I agree.
When you said that the problem with religions is that they tend to assign the probability of 1 to their priors, did you mean to include having some members who assign probability 1 to some priors in the category you were identifying as problematic?
Insofar the religion encourages or at least accepts those “some” members and stands behind them, and insofar these priors are important, yes.
OK, cool. Thanks for clarifying.
You make a very good point.
And has this nominally very good point changed your beliefs about anything related to this topic?
It changed my preferred method of approach slightly; I skip the “Yeah we’re a cult” and go straight to the “So what?” It’s a simple method: answer with a question, dodge the idiocy.
Cool.