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

Why are there so many rationalist cults?

asteriskmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 947 posts

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#601

Post by 6177c40f »

throwanem wrote: post #599
6177c40f wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a meaningful distinction- most rationalists aren't running murder cults.

That we know about, I suppose. We didn't know at one point there were any outright rationalist cults, after all, whether involved in sex, murder, both, or otherwise. That is, we didn't know there were subsets of self-identifying "rationalists" so erroneous in their axioms and tendentious in their analysis as to succeed in putting off others. But a movement, that demonstrates so remarkably elevated rate of generating…

I mean, as a rationalist, I can assure you it's not nearly as sinister a group as you seem to make it out to be, believe it or not. Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#602

Post by Dylan16807 »

derektank wrote: post #274
inasio wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saw once a discussion that people should not have kids as it's by far the highest increase in your carbon footprint in your lifetime (>10x than going vegan, etc) be driven all the way to advocating genocide as a way of carbon footprint minimization

Setting aside the reductio ad absurdum of genocide, this is an unfortunately common viewpoint. People really need to take into account the chances their child might wind up working on science or technology which reduces global CO2 emissions or even captures CO2. This reasoning can be applied to all sorts of naive "more people bad" arguments. I can't imagine where the world would be if Norman Borlaug's parents had dec…

> People really need to take into account the chances their child might wind up working on science or technology which reduces global CO2 emissions or even captures CO2.

All else equal, it would be better to spread those chances across a longer period of time at a lower population with lower carbon use.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#603

Post by a_bonobo »

This is a great article.

There's so much in these group dynamics that repeats group dynamics of communist extremists of the 70s. A group that has found a 'better' way of life, all you have to do is believe in the group's beliefs.

Compare this part from OP:

>Here is a sampling of answers from people in and close to dysfunctional groups: “We spent all our time talking about philosophy and psychology and human social dynamics, often within the group.” “Really tense ten-hour conversations about whether, when you ate the last chip, that was a signal that you were intending to let down your comrades in selfish ways in the future.”

This reeks of Marxist-Leninist self-criticism, where everybody tried to up each other in how ideologically pure they were. The most extreme outgrowing of self-criticism is when the Japanese United Red Army beat its own members to death as part of self-criticisms.

>'These violent beatings ultimately saw the death of 12 members of the URA who had been deemed not sufficiently revolutionary.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Red_Army

History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#604

Post by lmm »

gedy wrote: post #570
collingreen wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And therefore you should believe in me and my low low 10% tithe! That's the only way to not get tricked into believing something wrong so don't delay!

That's not an endorsement of a particular religion.

It is though. In practice it's always used to promote a particular religion.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#605

Post by throwanem »

6177c40f wrote: post #601
throwanem wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That we know about, I suppose. We didn't know at one point there were any outright rationalist cults, after all, whether involved in sex, murder, both, or otherwise. That is, we didn't know there were subsets of self-identifying "rationalists" so erroneous in their axioms and tendentious in their analysis as to succeed in putting off others. But a movement, that demonstrates so remarkably elevated rate of generating…

I mean, as a rationalist, I can assure you it's not nearly as sinister a group as you seem to make it out to be, believe it or not. Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults.

> Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults

This isn't the defense of rationalism you seem to imagine it to be.

I don't think the modal rationalist is sinister. I think he's ignorant, misguided, nearly wholly lacking in experience, deeply insecure about it, and overall just excessively resistant to the idea that it is really possible, on any matter of serious import, for his perspective radically to lack merit. Unfortunately, this latter condition proves very reliably also the mode.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#606

Post by antisthenes »

JohnMakin wrote: post #510
antisthenes wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy to read this, because by writing what you wrote you basically show that you don't understand what an axiom is. You need to review the definition of the word. > The smartest people I have ever known have been profoundly unsure of their beliefs and what they know. The smartest people are unsure about their higher level beliefs, but I can assure you that they almost certainly don't re-evaluate "axioms" as you…

> It's crazy to read this, because by writing what you wrote you basically show that you don't understand what an axiom is. You need to review the definition of the word. Oh, do enlighten then. > The smartest people are unsure about their higher level beliefs, but I can assure you that they almost certainly don't re-evaluate "axioms" as you put it on a daily or weekly basis. Not that it matters, as we almost certainl…

> Oh, do enlighten then.

Absolutely. Just in case your keyboard wasn't working to arrive at this link via Google.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/axiom

First definition, just in case it still isn't obvious.

> I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment, or are severely misinterpreting what I said. Clearly a nerve was struck though, and I do apologize for any undue distress.

Someone was wrong on the Internet! Just don't want other people getting the wrong idea. Good fun regardless.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#607

Post by antisthenes »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #452
antisthenes wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy to read this, because by writing what you wrote you basically show that you don't understand what an axiom is. You need to review the definition of the word. > The smartest people I have ever known have been profoundly unsure of their beliefs and what they know. The smartest people are unsure about their higher level beliefs, but I can assure you that they almost certainly don't re-evaluate "axioms" as you…

> If you think people can't arrive to a tangible and useful approximation of truth, then you are simply delusional Logic is only a map, not the territory. It is a new toy, still bright and shining from the box in terms of human history. Before logic there were other ways of thinking, and new ones will come after. Yet, Voltaire's bastards are always certain they're right, despite being right far less often than they b…

There is no (T)ruth, but there is a useful approximation of truth for 99.9% things that I want to do in life.

YMMV.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#608

Post by Dylan16807 »

staticman2 wrote: post #524
qcnguy wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which group of people giving modern training in philosophy should we judge the field by? If they can't use it correctly in such a basic case then who can?

Did the Duke philosophy teachers claim they were using philosophy to determine if someone was raped? And did all the philosophers at all the other colleges convene and announce they were also using philosophy to determine if someone was raped?

> Did the Duke philosophy teachers claim they were using philosophy to determine if someone was raped?

I don't think that matters very much. If there's a strong enough correlation between being a reactive idiot and the department you're in, it makes a bad case for enrolling in that realm of study for educational motives. It's especially bad when the realm of study is directly focused on knowledge, ethics, and logic.

Note the "if" though, I haven't evaluated the parent's claims. I'm just saying it doesn't matter if they said they used philosophy. It reflects on philosophy as a study, at least the style they do there.

How much that affects other colleges is iffier, but it's not zero.

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#609

Post by 6177c40f »

throwanem wrote: post #605
6177c40f wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, as a rationalist, I can assure you it's not nearly as sinister a group as you seem to make it out to be, believe it or not. Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults.

> Besides, the explanation is simpler than this article makes it out to be- most rationalists are from California, California is the origin of lots of cults This isn't the defense of rationalism you seem to imagine it to be. I don't think the modal rationalist is sinister. I think he's ignorant, misguided, nearly wholly lacking in experience, deeply insecure about it, and overall just excessively resistant to the ide…

> his perspective radically to lack merit

What perspective would that be?

Re: Why are there so many rationalist cults?

#610

Post by socalgal2 »

ar-nelson wrote: post #200
JohnMakin wrote: post #85

One of a few issues I have with groups like these, is that they often confidently and aggressively spew a set of beliefs that on their face logically follow from one another, until you realize they are built on a set of axioms that are either entirely untested or outright nonsense. This is common everywhere, but I feel especially pronounced in communities like this. It also involves quite a bit of navel gazing that m…

I find Yudowsky-style rationalists morbidly fascinating in the same way as Scientologists and other cults. Probably because they seem to genuinely believe they're living in a sci-fi story. I read a lot of their stuff, probably too much, even though I find it mostly ridiculous. The biggest nonsense axiom I see in the AI-cult rationalist world is recursive self-improvement. It's the classic reason superintelligence tak…

> it assumes that soon LLMs will gain the capability of assisting humans

No, it does not. It assumes there will be progress in AI. It does not assume that progress will be in LLMs

It doesn't require AI to be better than humans for AI to take over because unlike a human an AI can be cloned. You have have 2 AIs, then 4, then 8.... then millions. All able to do the same things as humans (the assumption of AGI). Build cars, build computers, build rockets, built space probes, build airplanes, build houses, build power plants, build factories. Build robot factories to create more robots and more power plants and more factories.

PS: Not saying I believe in the doom. But the thought experiment doesn't seem indefensible.

Post reply on HN