this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

1011 readers
1 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Can I argue that misrepresenting yourself in an argument intentionally is, in fact, done with ill intent an overwhelming majority of the time.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The article vacillates between saying sometimes identifying bad faith is good, actually, and trying to move the goal posts so everyone is still acting in good faith. Just about as good self-editing that I’d expect from LW.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

or very poor communication skills

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You can, but it’s not really an argument, more of a statement. For example, do you have any anecdotal evidence of this being true?

Maybe I’m just misunderstanding. You use the term “ill intent” which is subtly different from “bad faith”. It’s also a loaded term.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Using his own terminology here. He says in the piece that bad faith is often 'incorrectly' defined as ill intent, and my argument is that the ill intent is a package deal.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I still don't think this happens in an overwhelmingly proportion of arguments.