BerryPick6

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 8:56 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Con­fu­sion about Nor­ma­tive Morality

  Good luck. Nearly everything currently written on morality is horribly wrong. I took a few ethics classes, and they are mostly junk. Maybe things are better in proper philosophy, but I doubt it.

  I have a hunch things are a good bit better in proper philosophy than you think. Admittedly, most intro and medium level courses regarding ethics are pretty terrible (this is obviously only from personal experience.) If I had to make a guess as to why that is, it’d probably be for the same reason I think most of the rest of philosophy courses could be better: too much focus on history.

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 8:52 PM

  5 points

  in reply to: JMiller’s comment on: Con­fu­sion about Nor­ma­tive Morality

  Right now, the debate between consequentialism and deontology is hard for me to grasp, because I feel like by tabooing words I can re write any dilemma to sympathize with either theory.

  If I can recommend a textbook (I don’t know how acceptable a solution that is, but whatever) Normative Ethics helped me overcome a lot of confusion about terms and theories and realize that it’s not all just pure wordplay. It definitely helped me get a better handle on the specifics of the debate between the various normative moral positions.

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 8:39 PM

  1 point

  on: Con­fu­sion about Nor­ma­tive Morality

  I found myself extremely confused by nyan’s recent posts on the matter, but I think I understood the other sequences you mentioned quite well (particularly Luke’s.) What, specifically, do you find yourself confused about?

  As an aside, I’m also currently studying philosophy, and although I started out with a heavy focus on moral-phil, I’ve steadily found myself drawn to the more ‘techy’ fields and away from things like ethics...

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 7:08 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: ddxxdd’s comment on: Mo­ral­ity Isn’t Logical

  Thank you for an awesome read. :)

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 5:08 PM

  6 points

  in reply to: tgb’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  Two, in fact.

• BerryPick6Feb 7, 2013, 4:25 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: scav’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  Definitely a double, but I can’t link the others right now.

• BerryPick6Feb 4, 2013, 9:59 AM

  5 points

  in reply to: Kawoomba’s comment on: The Wrong­ness Iceberg

  What about the iceberg iceberg, when noticing your first iceberg you realize there was a metric ton of icebergs under the iceberg.

  Or a recursive iceberg, where you realize there’s a whole nautical mile worth of rabbit hole left to go down?

• BerryPick6Feb 4, 2013, 8:20 AM

  7 points

  in reply to: CCC’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  Only if they can trust the promise; once their term is up, the parties have little real incentive to stick to their promise, after all.

  In iterated games, defection has its price.

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 10:17 PM

  14 points

  in reply to: Kaj_Sotala’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  Gah! Spoiler!

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 10:08 PM

  −2 points

  in reply to: Peterdjones’s comment on: The Level Above Mine

  Yes. But he is a barely mediocre philosopher who is in no position to recognise real talent, whether EY’s, if it exists, or anyone else’s. He confuses ability with style or adherence to doctrines that he approves of.

  How much of CSA have you read? Search for the sweet-spot just before Luke discovered LW and you should find high level philosophy going on.

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 10:07 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Peterdjones’s comment on: The Level Above Mine

  What evidence gave you this impression?

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 9:49 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Kawoomba’s comment on: Nat­u­ral­ism ver­sus un­bounded (or un­max­imis­able) util­ity options

  I stopped watching Craig’s debates after Kagan smoked him so thoroughly that even the steelmanned versions of his arguments sounded embarrassing. The Bradley and Parsons debates are also definitely worth listening to, if only because it’s enjoyable (and I must admit, it was quite comforting at the time) to hear Craig get demolished.

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 9:34 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Kawoomba’s comment on: Nat­u­ral­ism ver­sus un­bounded (or un­max­imis­able) util­ity options

  Man, Rosenberg looked lost in that debate...

• BerryPick6Feb 3, 2013, 7:53 PM

  11 points

  in reply to: CCC’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  Wouldn’t they still have incentives to aid parties who promise to repay them once their term is up? Similar to how some legislators conveniently acquire lucrative positions requiring little-to-no effort on their part from companies who they have helped out through the years once they’ve retired from politics?

• BerryPick6Feb 2, 2013, 9:32 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: gwern’s comment on: Open Thread, Fe­bru­ary 1-14, 2013

  Terrific, thanks!

• BerryPick6Feb 2, 2013, 8:39 PM

  2 points

  on: Open Thread, Fe­bru­ary 1-14, 2013

  I’m planning on teaching myself a programming language (probably Python, via LPTHW) and I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on whether Anki would be helpful in this endeavor. Normally, I’d just go ahead and do it, but some of my friends who know how to code said it wouldn’t be helpful, even though they were hesitant to give reasons when pushed.

• BerryPick6Feb 2, 2013, 5:28 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Grif’s comment on: Ra­tion­al­ity Quotes Fe­bru­ary 2013

  This is from the Sam Harris vs. William Lane Craig debate, starting around the 44 minute mark. IIRC, Luke’s old website has a review of this particular debate.

• BerryPick6Feb 2, 2013, 12:53 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: negamuhia’s comment on: Fe­bru­ary 2013 Me­dia Thread

  Your family is awesome.

• BerryPick6Feb 1, 2013, 10:14 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: katydee’s comment on: The Zeroth Skillset

  I know a number of people who have died in the past 3-4 years, but they all happened to be in the army at the time, so I would consider myself unusual in this respect.

• BerryPick6Feb 1, 2013, 10:11 PM

  13 points

  in reply to: Stuart_Armstrong’s comment on: S.E.A.R.L.E’s COBOL room

  Searle’s response[1] :

  This objection really is only worth a short reply. The problem in this discussion is not about how I know that other people have cognitive states, but rather what it is that I am attributing to them when I attribute cognitive states to them. The thrust of the argument is that it couldn’t be just computational processes and their output because the computational processes and their output can exist without the cognitive state.

  Talk about begging the question...

  ---

  [1] Searle, John. 1980a. “Minds, Brains, and Programs.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3, 417-424.