I downvoted everyone who suggested that we call people who have not yet been exposed to rationality: “ignoramuses”, “stupid”, “ignorant”, or the like.
I would like to grow the LessWrong community, and calling everyone who isn’t already one of us names, is not the way to do it. Also, I find it offensive, and would like to see less comments like these.
“Ignorant” derives from the Latin ignorantia, from the verb ignorare, to not know. (The Dutch translation is “onwetend”, literally, “un-knowing”). If I had not been informed of the negative connotations it carries in English, I would have thought it a perfectly polite word to use.
People like to be able to dismiss any criticism as “calling names”, “ad hominem”. It is therefore unlikely that you’ll be able to find a term that captures the original meaning of (wilful) ignorance without the insulting connotations. If an alternative term were to find widespread use, people would just start taking offence at the new term—being offended allows them to ignore your criticism.
In French “ignorant” just means “not knowing”, and though it has a connotation of being generally uneducated and possibly stupid telling someone they’re ignorant in the context of a particular topic usually goes over well. The connotations in English are much more negative, and I got seriously bitten in the ass over that.
Point taken. I may even have to say “oops”. I have forgotten that naming categories tend to raise walls around them. (Here, using a word such as “unsane” or “non-sane” would tend to stigmatize even If I don’t want to).
I notice that you didn’t actually refute the claim. It seems that both you and the massively downvoted parent could both be true, and the combined suggestion is that communication incentives on the internet encourage a tendency towards hellishness…
O.o
...I’m not sure whether or how to update on this insight.
On top of Eugine_Nier said, I would add that when your second post on a site is standing at −10 karma, then you should probably update on your comment being more offensive than funny, rather than just assuming that no one else has a sense of humor.
I downvoted everyone who suggested that we call people who have not yet been exposed to rationality: “ignoramuses”, “stupid”, “ignorant”, or the like.
I would like to grow the LessWrong community, and calling everyone who isn’t already one of us names, is not the way to do it. Also, I find it offensive, and would like to see less comments like these.
“Ignorant” derives from the Latin ignorantia, from the verb ignorare, to not know. (The Dutch translation is “onwetend”, literally, “un-knowing”). If I had not been informed of the negative connotations it carries in English, I would have thought it a perfectly polite word to use.
People like to be able to dismiss any criticism as “calling names”, “ad hominem”. It is therefore unlikely that you’ll be able to find a term that captures the original meaning of (wilful) ignorance without the insulting connotations. If an alternative term were to find widespread use, people would just start taking offence at the new term—being offended allows them to ignore your criticism.
In French “ignorant” just means “not knowing”, and though it has a connotation of being generally uneducated and possibly stupid telling someone they’re ignorant in the context of a particular topic usually goes over well. The connotations in English are much more negative, and I got seriously bitten in the ass over that.
Point taken. I may even have to say “oops”. I have forgotten that naming categories tend to raise walls around them. (Here, using a word such as “unsane” or “non-sane” would tend to stigmatize even If I don’t want to).
“A world without humor is indistinguishable from hell.” Try to laugh every once in a while, don’t take my silly comments seriously.
Useful advise: on the internet no one can tell when you’re trying to be sarcastic.
“No one” is way too strong, but it is somewhat harder than in meatspace.
I notice that you didn’t actually refute the claim. It seems that both you and the massively downvoted parent could both be true, and the combined suggestion is that communication incentives on the internet encourage a tendency towards hellishness…
O.o
...I’m not sure whether or how to update on this insight.
On top of Eugine_Nier said, I would add that when your second post on a site is standing at −10 karma, then you should probably update on your comment being more offensive than funny, rather than just assuming that no one else has a sense of humor.