RE: META: Dishonest debate (was "cluster bombs")

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 2003 - 17:41:01 MDT

  • Next message: Alex Ramonsky: "Re: META: Time to enforce the List Rules! (personal revelation)"

    Eliezer writes

    > Lee Corbin wrote:
    > >
    > > Quite right. That is what is going on. But in addition
    > > there is also
    > >
    > > * joining the good fight against bad memes
    > > * venting one's feelings
    > > * standing up for the underdog
    > >
    > > and more, I suspect. The first on my list of three here is
    > > what inspires crusaders to fight for the oppressed, and gives
    > > them energy that the Bayesians lack. I have respect for the
    > > crusaders (occasionally I am one), both the ones for and against
    > > the ideas I support. They have played and will play a crucial
    > > role in history and in society.
    >
    > *I'm* not a crusader? Think about this one carefully.

    Sorry. You are indeed a crusader for certain things.
    And about those things you will hardly be unbiased.
    I don't know if that makes you less of a "Bayesian"
    on those subjects in certain discussions.

    > Also, do you think that patriotic cheerleading actually helps anyone, or
    > for that matter, accomplishes anything significant at all?

    Yes.

    > I do not count cheerleading as "fighting for the oppressed".

    But it often has been. Whether it would be physically cheering
    the speakers in 1920 at a woman's rights meeting, or writing a
    "me too" letter in the newspaper about Chinese government abuses
    does (perhaps unfortunately) have an effect.

    But I would have to know more what you mean by "cheerleading".
    Mere cheering is while (sadly) effective, it could be that
    cheer-leading mobilizes support. Are you being as careful as
    you'd like to be as you re-label and thus re-characterize
    some activity that we had been calling by other terms? (Namely
    patriotism?)

    > It would appear some people think they can make their basketball team win
    > by rooting at the television set. Enthusiasm is not effectiveness.
    > Harvey Newstrom has described the only actual effect of all their
    > shouting: sharply negative on the real-world events that matter.

    I would be the first to find fault with demonstrations and
    "me too", or "yay!" type support. That's why I am interested
    in carefully reasoned discourse. But when you use such broad
    terms I'm not sure I know what exactly you are talking about,
    or whether, for sure, you are describing activity on this list.

    Lee



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 17 2003 - 17:50:41 MDT