|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Inadequate Equilibria (Read 2576 times)
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 3874
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
I did read that book. I agree with the review of it that said it seemed like it was two books, the first of which was great, and the second of which was kind of all right.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Zanthius
Enlightened
Offline
Posts: 941
|
I did read that book. I agree with the review of it that said it seemed like it was two books, the first of which was great, and the second of which was kind of all right.
I have now written this on my front page:
Traditions and social environments that give us unwise incentives, make us prone to behave in many suboptimal ways. Countries might for example use lots of money on military expenditures, which might seem like a good idea if other countries are doing the same. However, if we didn't feel threatened by other countries, we could use that money on other more constructive things, such as education and health care. Similarly, it might seem like a good idea for researchers to publish articles in prestigious journals, since that can make them more famous. However, access to articles from those journals is often very expensive, and if universities didn't need to use so much money on access journals and databases, they could use that money on other more constructive things.
In order for our global society to become more prosperous, we need to motivate right behavior. We might to some degree influence the behavior of future generations through education. We might however be able to facilitate this even faster if a large amount of adult people get better informed about these things. This website is an attempt to create a framework for such a transformation.
https://www.archania.org/
BTW. What do you think of Sam Harris?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 12:22:38 am by Zanthius »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3874
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
I only really heard of him in the atheism vs religion debates. IIRC, both of the times I've heard of his having an opinion on anything else, I've disagreed, but as you can see from my only being aware of two such, I haven't been following closely.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Zanthius
Enlightened
Offline
Posts: 941
|
I only really heard of him in the atheism vs religion debates. IIRC, both of the times I've heard of his having an opinion on anything else, I've disagreed, but as you can see from my only being aware of two such, I haven't been following closely.
Ok. He seems to get along pretty well with Eliezer Yudkowsky in podcast 116 about AI. I also find podcast 119 and 120 interesting, and none of them are about religion. I must admit however, that I have only recently started listening to his podcasts, and so far I have been maybe more impressed by his guests than by him.
He is going to have a new conversation with Jordan Peterson this summer. I think I am going to write Sam Harris an email, with tips about how to argue against Jordan Peterson's religious convictions. Last time they met in podcast 67, his arguments against Jordan Peterson's religious convictions were way too general. In order to destroy Jordan Peterson's religious convictions, I think he needs to address his specific claims, rather than make it into a general criticism of Christianity.
In the past, there have been tons of Christian revivals, so apparently humans are extremely prone to engage in this. I guess that every time there is a revival, people feel like all the criticism of Christianity from the past is invalidated. This is however not the time for another Christian revival, based upon Jordan Peterson's convictions. Now is the time to move forwards, not backwards.
I have now sent him an email with some hints about how to argue against Jordan Peterson's religious convictions. 
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 10:42:20 pm by Zanthius »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3874
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
Want to reword that from 'attack X' where X is a person?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
