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

Persuasion through status rather than argument

robkhenderson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 251 posts

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#131

Post by atmavatar »

Geee wrote: post #124
Tainnor wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an unregulated market, capital very naturally tends to accumulate more capital - while, if you have nothing, it's very hard to build up capital in the first place. Which means that, if this continues indefinitely, more and more things belong to fewer and fewer people - which is exactly what we've been seeing over the last couple of decades.

This is a very good thing, and the reason why capitalism works. The idea of pure meritocratic capitalism is that capital is allowed to accumulate to those who use capital most efficiently. There are fewer of those, naturally. Increasing capital efficiency benefits everyone; it means less work and more production, i.e. there's more of everything and everything is cheaper. The actual issues of our current world happen…

I feel like you're missing an important detail: in an unregulated market, it is often times far more efficient from an individual corporation's perspective to buy up or merge with competitors than to actually compete, whereas the societal-level efficiencies you're lauding come from competition itself. Without some form of regulation, capitalism trends towards monopoly, which is the antithesis of efficiency.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#132

Post by anonymouskimmer »

karmakaze wrote: post #101
motohagiography wrote: post #72

A lot of intelligent people aren't very smart, and a lot of smart people aren't very intelligent. The smart achive desirable outcomes, and usually that means not rocking the boat. The intelligent have a capacity for abstraction, which means it's easy to misunderstand why people are parroting absurdities. Where a good programmer is intelligent, a good product manager is smart. I was surprised he didn't include this Da…

The use of smart vs intelligent here is arbitrary though illustrates the difference. I've also seen the reverse: smart aleck/smart ass, too smart for their own good. I would say that being pragmatic captures the outcomes one. A good programmer and product manager are both, but with switched weightings as indicated.

> The use of smart vs intelligent here is arbitrary though illustrates the difference.

Dungeons and Dragons insightfully divided these intelligences up into Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#133

Post by naasking »

leni536 wrote: post #96
naasking wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not actually feasible to create a vacuum tube hundreds of km long Why not? It's just a series of smaller sections that must each individually achieve near vacuum.

I think the main problem is that the failure of a small section is a catastrophic failure of the whole system.

I don't see why you can't compartmentalize it exactly like how I described. A leak in one of the ISS's modules wouldn't take down the whole ISS.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#134

Post by habinero »

carlosjobim wrote: post #115
habinero wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Communism as defined by Marx and as practiced by the Soviet Union, China, and the DDR. But you can expand to socialism in the widest sense if you like. Still a bad idea that attracts some very smart people.

I said your own words, not "as defined by" others.

I've yet to meet anyone who throws around "communism" like that who uses it as anything but a vacuous memetic catchphrase, detached from any real understanding.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#135

Post by naasking »

tsimionescu wrote: post #104
naasking wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not actually feasible to create a vacuum tube hundreds of km long Why not? It's just a series of smaller sections that must each individually achieve near vacuum.

Having a vacuum chamber large enough for a train to not only fit in but actually move through at high speed before getting to the next section still requires a few hundred meters per section if not more. That in itself is insanely difficult. Connecting multiple such sections while maintaining the vacuum is more difficult still. And still, you'll need thousands of pumping stations all around the middle of nowhere, tha…

The LHC achieves a hard vacuum over 27 km, and also features superconductors along its length, so clearly that combo is doable over an extended length. I'm not trying to trivialize the engineering challenges here, but I've seen that people have tendency to immediately jump from "it's hard" to "it's impossible or infeasible", even though no one's even made an attempt. Some clever engineering could await discovery that makes it all simpler.

Sometimes this sort of skepticism is warranted because our understanding is sufficient (like our understanding of material science needed for a space elevator), but sometimes this is less clear, and I think hyperloop concepts fall into the latter category.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#136

Post by anonymouskimmer »

ethanbond wrote: post #64
jackcosgrove wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can remember it, the American media and foreign policy establishment was fully in support of the war in Iraq. That actually is a really good example of what the author describes because I'm sure many knew it was a bad idea but went along with it to preserve their careers. I think we should be charitable with the author and not assume a "dumb idea" is something he disagrees with, but rather is something that wa…

I mean you can also just read the author’s other content which is mostly whining about woke-ism but with lots of Substack intellectualism piled on top. Edit: Just to specifically point out the effects of this author’s “motivation,” the cited article on myside bias actually doesn’t say this: > Students and graduates of top universities are more prone to myside bias. They are more likely to “evaluate evidence, generate…

> And in fact, if anything, it’d suggest the exact opposite of what the author implies by virtue of a really simple, obvious fact: an expert’s social circle is more likely to be well-informed on the domain of expertise than the social circle of a complete outsider.

Which makes it really important to determine the actual boundaries of that domain of expertise.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#137

Post by anonymouskimmer »

naasking wrote: post #133
leni536 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the main problem is that the failure of a small section is a catastrophic failure of the whole system.

I don't see why you can't compartmentalize it exactly like how I described. A leak in one of the ISS's modules wouldn't take down the whole ISS.

And then what? The train just stops in the middle of nowhere for however many days until the one chamber is fixed?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#138

Post by anonymouskimmer »

mjburgess wrote: post #29

The only issue here is calling the 'tribal mode' peripheral -- no, no, it's the default. The human species is first divided into tribes, and much latterly, individuals. ie., Individual human psychology is governed principally by tribal logic -- though 'thinking for oneself' in the broadest sense is always available, it is rarely exercised outside of certain kinds non-social problem environments. Intellectuals are of…

> The human species is first divided into tribes, and much latterly, individuals. ie., Individual human psychology is governed principally by tribal logic -- though 'thinking for oneself' in the broadest sense is always available, it is rarely exercised outside of certain kinds non-social problem environments.

No, this priority varies between individuals. And you left out the mating pair-bond from your analysis. This is a very basic introduction, and there are some arguments and nitpicks from others who study the subject, but it gets across the gist of the idea: https://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/variants

These three instincts are present in everyone (barring gross brain damage), but are in varying orders of priority.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#139

Post by anonymouskimmer »

jackcosgrove wrote: post #41

I was nodding a lot reading this piece, but something did seem incongruous. The author claims "peripheral route" opinions are becoming more common because of information overload and the need to be parsimonious when forming opinions. He also claims that peripheral route opinions are more weakly held than central route opinions. How does that account for increasing ideological polarization, when you would expect peopl…

I thought he kind of addressed that.

> This means we can be more easily manipulated through the peripheral route. If we are convinced of something via the peripheral route, a manipulator will be more successful at using the peripheral route once again to alter our initial belief.

emphasis mine.

So basically, he claims that because peripheral information is more loosely held, peripheral beliefs are also more easily altered. Thus you have the rabbit hole effect leading to "pilling" and extreme beliefs.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#140

Post by Obscurity4340 »

motohagiography wrote: post #72

A lot of intelligent people aren't very smart, and a lot of smart people aren't very intelligent. The smart achive desirable outcomes, and usually that means not rocking the boat. The intelligent have a capacity for abstraction, which means it's easy to misunderstand why people are parroting absurdities. Where a good programmer is intelligent, a good product manager is smart. I was surprised he didn't include this Da…

I really love this quote, it meshes well with the concept of authenticity and setting boundaries in the context of interpersonal relationships. I would like to add or counter the aspect about becoming evil with one becoming vacant and "requiring" substances to alter themselves sufficiently to perform to the dominant social playbook that is relevant to their context.

It hits very close to home, if not entirely so

Edit: I hesitate to furnish this example but this seems to be what's up with Melania Trump. Don't wanna get political but imagine the dissonance of someone who married purely for money and is ruthlessly valued purely for her value as a trophy and softening agent for her husband and is cheated on while she's fucking pregnant with the next son. She might have preferred that in function if not in form by which I mean maybe it only became humilisting when it broke the news but its no less a tacit proof of concept that Trump was bored and did not find her desirable anymore. I do not envy those who marry for money. The inevitable divorce is gonna suck when he leaves her with all the debt

Post reply on HN