From: Zack M. Davis Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:17:01 +0000 (-0800) Subject: miserable day of being too trigger-shy to edit X-Git-Url: http://534655.efjtl6rk.asia/source?a=commitdiff_plain;h=588f6834eb8ae1272babaec5a827474d86a2540d;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git miserable day of being too trigger-shy to edit --- diff --git a/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md b/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md index 8701605..cc1d69e 100644 --- a/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md +++ b/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md @@ -513,7 +513,9 @@ Eliezer Yudkowsky did not _unambiguously_ choose Feelings. He's been very carefu In making such boasts, I think Yudkowsky is opting in to being held to higher standards than other mortals. If Scott Alexander gets something wrong when I was trusting him to be right, that's disappointing, but I'm not the victim of false advertising, because Scott Alexander doesn't claim to be anything more than some guy with a blog. If I trusted him more than that, that's on me. -If Eliezer Yudkowsky gets something wrong when I was trusting him to be right, and refuses to acknowledge corrections (in the absence of an unsustainable 21-month nagging campaign), and keeps inventing new galaxy-brained ways to be wrong in the service of his political agenda of being seen to agree with Stalin without technically lying, then I think I _am_ the victim of false advertising. His marketing bluster was designed to trick people like me into trusting him, even if my being dumb enough to believe him is on me.[^gullible] +If Eliezer Yudkowsky gets something wrong when I was trusting him to be right, and refuses to acknowledge corrections (in the absence of an unsustainable 21-month nagging campaign), and keeps inventing new galaxy-brained ways to be wrong in the service of his political agenda of being seen to agree with Stalin without technically lying, then I think I _am_ the victim of false advertising.[^gould-analogy] His marketing bluster was designed to trick people like me into trusting him, even if my being dumb enough to believe him is on me.[^gullible] + +[^gould-analogy]: Yudkowsky [once wrote of Stephen Jay Gould](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/BahoNzY2pzSeM2Dtk/beware-of-stephen-j-gould) that "[c]onsistently self-serving scientific 'error', in the face of repeated correction and without informing others of the criticism, blends over into scientific fraud." I think the same standard applies here. [^gullible]: Perhaps some readers will consider this post to be more revealing about my character rather than Yudkowsky's: that [everybody knows](https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/07/02/everybody-knows/) his bluster wasn't supposed to be taken seriously, so I have no more right to complain about "false advertising" than purchasers of a ["World's Best"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffery) ice-cream who are horrified (or pretending to be) that it may not objectively be the best in the world. @@ -553,9 +555,9 @@ The modern Yudkowsky [writes](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/10967695793 I notice that this advice fails to highlight the possibility that the "seems to believe" is a deliberate show (judged to be personally prudent and not community-harmful), rather than a misperception on your part. I am left shaking my head in a [weighted average of](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/y4bkJTtG3s5d6v36k/stupidity-and-dishonesty-explain-each-other-away) sadness about the mortal frailty of my former hero, and disgust at his duplicity. **If Eliezer Yudkowsky can't _unambiguously_ choose Truth over Feelings, _then Eliezer Yudkowsky is a fraud_.** -A few clarifications are in order here. First, this usage of "fraud" isn't a meaningless [boo light](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/dLbkrPu5STNCBLRjr/applause-lights). I specifically and literally mean it in [_Merriam-Webster_'s sense 2.a., "a person who is not what he or she pretends to be"](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud)—and I think I've made my case. Someone who disagrees with my assessment needs to argue that I've gotten some specific thing wrong, [rather than objecting to character attacks on procedural grounds](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pkaagE6LAsGummWNv/contra-yudkowsky-on-epistemic-conduct-for-author-criticism). +A few clarifications are in order here. First, this usage of "fraud" isn't a meaningless [boo light](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/dLbkrPu5STNCBLRjr/applause-lights). I specifically and literally mean it in [_Merriam-Webster_'s sense 2.a., "a person who is not what he or she pretends to be"](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud)—and I think I've made my case. (The "epistemic hero" posturing isn't compatible with the "sometimes personally prudent and not community-harmful" prevarication; he needs to choose one or the other.) Someone who disagrees with my assessment needs to argue that I've gotten some specific thing wrong, [rather than objecting to character attacks on procedural grounds](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pkaagE6LAsGummWNv/contra-yudkowsky-on-epistemic-conduct-for-author-criticism). -Second, it's a conditional: _if_ Yudkowsky can't unambiguously choose Truth over Feelings, _then_ he's a fraud. If he wanted to come clean—if he decided after all that he wanted it to be common knowledge in his Caliphate that gender-dysphoric people can stand what is true, because we are already enduring it—he could do so at any time. +Second, it's a conditional: _if_ Yudkowsky can't unambiguously choose Truth over Feelings, _then_ he's a fraud. If he wanted to come clean, he could do so at any time. He probably won't. We've already seen from his behavior that he doesn't give a shit what people like me think of his intellectual integrity. Why would that change? diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index 96c330b..0dc643f 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -3,7 +3,8 @@ pt. 4 edit tier— ✓ make sure I'm summarizing "policy debates" moral from "Challenges" ✓ revise "too good a writer" to be more explicit "someone could be that naive" ✓ footnote about how I could be blamed for being too credulous? -_ Stephen Jay Gould +✓ Stephen Jay Gould +_ emphasize that the philosophy-of-language thing is much worse _ edit post to clarify "nudging the cognition" _ Tail's objection to FFS example _ Brennan "everyone else should participate" needs more wording adjustments @@ -13,15 +14,13 @@ _ emphasize that the philosophy-of-language thing was MUCH worse _ note the "larger than protons" concession _ look for a place to link http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/discursive-warfare-and-faction-formation/ _ parenthetical defending literal fraud? -_ link https://thingofthings.substack.com/p/why-callout-posts-often-include-trivial _ the mailing list post noted it as a "common sexual fantasy" _ Feynman, "pretend that the master truthseekers of any age of history" _ Dawkins (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/20/richard-dawkins-loses-humanist-of-the-year-trans-comments) and Jerry Coyne (https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/08/27/on-helen-joyces-trans/) and Hooven (https://www.thefp.com/p/carole-hooven-why-i-left-harvard) -_ emphasize that the philosophy-of-language thing is much worse _ it's gotten worse in the past 10–20 years _ social gender, hair color, and "believing in" _ cite more sneers; use a footnote to pack in as many as possible -_ "if he decided after all that" exact clause + time-sensitive globals TODOs— ✓ consult Said @@ -2868,5 +2867,8 @@ https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1356494399945854976 > Anyone who's worked with me on public comms knows that among my first instructions is "We only use valid arguments here." (Which makes hiring writers difficult; they have to know the difference.) I've never called for lying to the public. Label the shit you make up as made-up. https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1760133310024671583 -https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/BahoNzY2pzSeM2Dtk/beware-of-stephen-j-gould -> there comes a point in self-deception where it becomes morally indistinguishable from lying. Consistently self-serving scientific "error", in the face of repeated correction and without informing others of the criticism, blends over into scientific fraud. + +> there comes a point in self-deception where it becomes morally indistinguishable from lying. + + + diff --git a/notes/memoir_wordcounts.csv b/notes/memoir_wordcounts.csv index 3896a15..04428e7 100644 --- a/notes/memoir_wordcounts.csv +++ b/notes/memoir_wordcounts.csv @@ -679,4 +679,5 @@ 02/24/2024,118965,0 02/25/2024,118965,0 02/26/2024,118965,0 -02/27/2024, \ No newline at end of file +02/27/2024,118989,14 +02/28/2024,, \ No newline at end of file