Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manifesto of the Silent Minority

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#21

Post by dsr_ »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #20
rcruzeiro wrote: post #8

Not really sure of the value of this is? Unless I am missing something, this reads like it was written by an "edgy teenager". Perhaps I am just missing some context.

I think it’s satire. If not, then I truly feel sorry for some folks. The "Thiel Question" is Id-mining. One of the things I often hear, when people are talking about "shock jocks" (both left and right), is "They are just saying what everyone is thinking." In my experience, there's a reason that we don't just say what we think.

That reason, in my case, is usually "I haven't thought out the long-term consequences of this, and I suspect that things really wouldn't turn out very well if it were generally in effect for long enough."

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#22

Post by siltpotato »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #20
rcruzeiro wrote: post #8

Not really sure of the value of this is? Unless I am missing something, this reads like it was written by an "edgy teenager". Perhaps I am just missing some context.

I think it’s satire. If not, then I truly feel sorry for some folks. The "Thiel Question" is Id-mining. One of the things I often hear, when people are talking about "shock jocks" (both left and right), is "They are just saying what everyone is thinking." In my experience, there's a reason that we don't just say what we think.

Perhaps, whether correct or incorrect (and let’s face it, it’s a tactic of rhetoric whether true or not to hint there’s a lot of people on your side), the idea of “just saying what everyone is thinking” being gotten across is a notion of trying to break the fear of being the first person to say that the emperor has no clothes. “No fear, I’ve crossed that water first, you are free to imitate.”

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#23

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

dsr_ wrote: post #21
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s satire. If not, then I truly feel sorry for some folks. The "Thiel Question" is Id-mining. One of the things I often hear, when people are talking about "shock jocks" (both left and right), is "They are just saying what everyone is thinking." In my experience, there's a reason that we don't just say what we think.

That reason, in my case, is usually "I haven't thought out the long-term consequences of this, and I suspect that things really wouldn't turn out very well if it were generally in effect for long enough."

I won’t get into it, but, on any given day, I have at least a dozen thoughts, that, if I acted on them, would have a SWAT team at my door.

Even just letting these reptile-brain thoughts out on a leash, is dangerous, as that’s the first step towards realization.

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#26

Post by foxhop »

rusk wrote: post #15
_y5hn wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, with today's standards of critical thinking and speaking, you get fired for speaking independently, this is more likely to spawn a new movement rather than provoke thoughtful responses.

> today’s standards “Today’s”? There has never been a better time for freedom of speech. You can pretty much say whatever you want and nobody is going to put you in jail or burn you at the stake. Indeed you have tools like never before with which to promulgate your message. Even if your remarks are racist, xenophobic, misogynistic or some other kind of bigoted you can still pretty say much whatever you like and there…

The workplace has become hostile against certain thought and has fully adopted another. You will get fired for speaking against the entrenched thought. This is exactly what was said in the above comment.

If I said leave your politics and religion at the door and just do your job in a "safe space zoom call" or at a diversity committee, or at lunch, I'd be fired.

The silent ones just want to do our jobs but increasingly the ones with political power inside institutions of work have the control to setup the stage for only one type of thought.

I just want to do my job without going into these topics which occupy the majority of the companies all hands time and corporate communications.

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#27

Post by secretsatan »

_y5hn wrote: post #10
giantDinosaur wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the Thiel Question. The value in it is supposed to be that it generates thoughtful and insightful responses - if you are right and 99% of people are wrong then that is indeed impressive. Unfortunately, it selects purely from the extremes, where real insight is random. If it generated more concrete (i.e. scientific) responses that could be tested, it would be a much better question.

Unfortunately, with today's standards of critical thinking and speaking, you get fired for speaking independently, this is more likely to spawn a new movement rather than provoke thoughtful responses.

We live in an era when anyone can setup a multinational company.

If you want to limit your market, setup your own company and alienate your customers and limit your recruitment to a narrow field of people who think like you, don't be suprised when you don't attract the best talent

Re: Manifesto of the Silent Minority

#29

Post by NateEag »

gerikson wrote: post #19
henryaj wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RationalWiki should also be taken with a heavy dose of scepticism!

The skepticism is included in RationalWiki.

I get that this is a joke, and I haven't spent much time on RationalWiki, but I feel compelled to point out that they aren't actually that skeptical.

It seems to me to embody an unflinching, burning faith that using analytical tools and reason will always yield the right answers.

The idea that the human mind might be too limited to understand everything seems like a foreign idea there.

Ditto the idea that strict formal reasoning is not always the best approach to thinking.

Don't get me wrong - I think logic is an invaluable tool, and I believe we should try to understand things beyond our current limits.

I just also believe we need to admit what those limits are, and always remember our fallibility.

Post reply on HN