Personally, I don’t endorse political discussions either, however I find CronoDAS’s interpretation reasonable, for reasons I have explained in the parent. Do you dispute that wrong beliefs about politics have high utility costs, or that a discussion on LW would probably bring clarity? Or you think that anything short of explicit and specific demand to lift the ban cannot be interpreted as a proposal going in that direction?
Do you dispute that wrong beliefs about politics have high utility costs
No
or that a discussion on LW would probably bring clarity?
Maybe.
If LW could come up with some way to counter the mind-killing effects of politics, and develop a mechanism for reliably, repeatably holding discussions on politically charged issues without them devolving into irrationality, well then that would be awesome—LW would have done a great service to mankind in developing such a system. I’m just skeptical as to whether that’s possible, since it’s been tried so many times before, and so far, never succeeded. I’m definitely not saying we should give up—it’s certainly a noble goal—I just think we should be very careful about letting a failed experiment in this direction have a corrupting influence on the successful elements that LW has been able to build so far.
Do you dispute that wrong beliefs about politics have high utility costs
No
or that a discussion on LW would probably bring clarity?
Maybe.
If LW could come up with some way to counter the mind-killing effects of politics, and develop a mechanism for reliably, repeatably holding discussions on politically charged issues without them devolving into irrationality, well then that would be awesome—LW would have done a great service to mankind in developing such a system. I’m just skeptical as to whether that’s possible, since it’s been tried so many times before, and so far, never succeeded. I’m definitely not saying we should give up—it’s certainly a noble goal—I just think we should be very careful about letting a failed experiment in this direction have a corrupting influence on the successful elements that LW has been able to build so far.
Personally, I don’t endorse political discussions either, however I find CronoDAS’s interpretation reasonable, for reasons I have explained in the parent. Do you dispute that wrong beliefs about politics have high utility costs, or that a discussion on LW would probably bring clarity? Or you think that anything short of explicit and specific demand to lift the ban cannot be interpreted as a proposal going in that direction?
No
Maybe.
If LW could come up with some way to counter the mind-killing effects of politics, and develop a mechanism for reliably, repeatably holding discussions on politically charged issues without them devolving into irrationality, well then that would be awesome—LW would have done a great service to mankind in developing such a system. I’m just skeptical as to whether that’s possible, since it’s been tried so many times before, and so far, never succeeded. I’m definitely not saying we should give up—it’s certainly a noble goal—I just think we should be very careful about letting a failed experiment in this direction have a corrupting influence on the successful elements that LW has been able to build so far.
I agree.
No
Maybe.
If LW could come up with some way to counter the mind-killing effects of politics, and develop a mechanism for reliably, repeatably holding discussions on politically charged issues without them devolving into irrationality, well then that would be awesome—LW would have done a great service to mankind in developing such a system. I’m just skeptical as to whether that’s possible, since it’s been tried so many times before, and so far, never succeeded. I’m definitely not saying we should give up—it’s certainly a noble goal—I just think we should be very careful about letting a failed experiment in this direction have a corrupting influence on the successful elements that LW has been able to build so far.