new Sin I've noticed: using shitty (weak) arguments for things Spose you have some preference or normative belief, and you try to justify a policy implied by this belief using a transparently (to someone who doesnt share your preference) dumb argument with a positive component
-
-
I am saying basically the kind of transparently dumb arguments you're talking about can become moral turning points. And that a "transparently dumb" argument is often one founded on a Haidtian moral foundation that you don't have (or only hold very weakly). For instance, Volk.
-
yeah, I feel you hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm tfw too robotic too correctly model hoomans, beep boop
-
Tweet unavailable
-
yes, I'm being contentious because I noticed him picking out generalized mechanisms for a preference cascade and wanted to point out that this thing swings both ways.
-
didn't read as contentious, I thought it was helpful more to mull ^^
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.