Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2 • Hacker News Board

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#11

Post by ancarda » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 2:45 PM UTC

tomhoward wrote: post #6

malms wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mm you should spend some time with in a flatearther fb group. Thats when i learnt the true sentence "dont wrestle with pigs, you get dirty and the pig likes it" ><

Isn’t the Flat Earth movement a 4chan troll?

Could have started that way, but it seems to have gone beyond that. I'd recommend watching Beyond the Curve (2018) -- https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8132700/

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#12

Post by nilskidoo » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 2:58 PM UTC

As an alternative to a bad map or no map, sometimes alternative solutions get shot down over pure arrogance, as with Musk's clear jealousy of that swim team guy who saved the kids from the cave. Musk wanted to be the hero, that mattered to him more than actually saving anybody, and so he went out of his way to critique and defame. Instead of appreciating the job well done and lives saved, he inserted himself into the situation. Jealousy can be a powerful motive all by itself, and is too often weaponized.

Also, I wonder where the dividing line between epistemic humility and thinking outside of boxes rests. I mean, is it purely circumstantial, or dependent upon personality traits?

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#13

Post by conjectures » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 3:25 PM UTC

There's definitely space for more thinking about epistemic security issues.

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#14

Post by j_m_b » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

"The map is not the territory" is an idea originating from Alfred Korzybski. He isn't even mentioned in this article.

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#15

Post by JTbane » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

>Experts wielding their jargon and credentials as devices to shut up non-experts, even if non-experts have credible critiques and ideas to offer

I don't know if I can agree with this: a layperson might make some ridiculous claim about vaccines causing autism, and a medical doctor absolutely has the right to dismiss them based on credentials.

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#16

Post by beepp » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #8

I have a funny feeling that this guy is going to push an agenda, particularly with his "free candy" example. The trouble with the "the revolt of the masses" theme is that institutions are failing us, experts are frequently wrong, and if you want to see fake experts turn on cable news and there you are... Cokie Roberts is always warning democrats to turn the right or otherwise we'll have to have somebody like Pinochet…

I certainly agree that experts of various calibers and professions are frequently wrong. However, if I have an agenda, I haven't figured out what it is yet ;)

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#17

Post by beepp » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 5:02 PM UTC

j_m_b wrote: post #14

"The map is not the territory" is an idea originating from Alfred Korzybski. He isn't even mentioned in this article.

I have edited my post to rectify this. Thank you for the suggestion.

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#18

Post by beepp » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 5:12 PM UTC

JTbane wrote: post #15

>Experts wielding their jargon and credentials as devices to shut up non-experts, even if non-experts have credible critiques and ideas to offer I don't know if I can agree with this: a layperson might make some ridiculous claim about vaccines causing autism, and a medical doctor absolutely has the right to dismiss them based on credentials.

At this point, there is no _credible_ evidence I'm aware of that suggests vaccines cause autism. Hence, a doctor dismissing those claims is reasonable and expected. There is no claim here that non-experts necessarily have the same credibility as experts.

My statement was more in reference to e.g. the use by some experts of esoteric and potentially inaccurate models to silence critique by overwhelming non-experts with jargon. "I spent years developing this model, what do you know?"

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#19

Post by mistermann » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 6:06 PM UTC

beepp wrote: post #18

JTbane wrote: post #15

>Experts wielding their jargon and credentials as devices to shut up non-experts, even if non-experts have credible critiques and ideas to offer I don't know if I can agree with this: a layperson might make some ridiculous claim about vaccines causing autism, and a medical doctor absolutely has the right to dismiss them based on credentials.

At this point, there is no _credible_ evidence I'm aware of that suggests vaccines cause autism. Hence, a doctor dismissing those claims is reasonable and expected. There is no claim here that non-experts necessarily have the same credibility as experts. My statement was more in reference to e.g. the use by some experts of esoteric and potentially inaccurate models to silence critique by overwhelming non-experts with…

> At this point, there is no _credible_ evidence I'm aware of that suggests vaccines cause autism.

This is true, but is the data upon which the statistics "proving" no causative relationship at all between vaccines and autism completely comprehensive and absolutely correct? I wonder how many people who consider themselves educated on the matter of vaccines have bothered to actually do any significant reading on the subject.

> Hence, a doctor dismissing those claims is reasonable and expected.

Reasonable and expected sure, but objectively correct is another thing.

Similarly, asserting that vaccines do cause autism is a very different thing than simply asking for evidence that they do not, ever, and wanting to know specific details on the source/methodology behind the evidence.

Related, hat tip to lp2019 in the thread for part 1 of this essay: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/introduction-the-fairway

Re: Intellectual Denial of Service Attacks, Part 2

#20

Post by beepp » Sat, Mar 09, 2019, 6:54 PM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #19

beepp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, there is no _credible_ evidence I'm aware of that suggests vaccines cause autism. Hence, a doctor dismissing those claims is reasonable and expected. There is no claim here that non-experts necessarily have the same credibility as experts. My statement was more in reference to e.g. the use by some experts of esoteric and potentially inaccurate models to silence critique by overwhelming non-experts with…

> At this point, there is no _credible_ evidence I'm aware of that suggests vaccines cause autism. This is true, but is the data upon which the statistics "proving" no causative relationship at all between vaccines and autism completely comprehensive and absolutely correct? I wonder how many people who consider themselves educated on the matter of vaccines have bothered to actually do any significant reading on the s…

I do not consider myself educated on the matter of vaccines and am ill-equipped to defend any position on either side :) To your point, proving a negative such as "vaccines definitively do NOT cause autism, ever" with 100% certainty is nontrivial. I simply haven't seen any compelling evidence that they are causally linked to autism, which is usually the claim.