scientists know better, people should listen to them

Conditionally true, but not always true, and so can become both wrong and annoying when used fully generally as in the video.

only science can give any measure of certainty in knowledge, and Bayesian rationality is the fastest and most reliable way to find the right hypotheses to test

Not quite the LW position. Knowledge comes from evidence, science finds publicly verifiable knowledge.

the Machine (the FGAI specifically) will make everything better or at least more interesting

There is no "the Machine" to promote, we should stick to "a machine," which will do things if built, rather than "will." This strict factualness also keeps us from using the same mental machinery as a messianic cult, which is good both cosmetically and practically.

scientists who are religious Outside The Laboratory are Doing It Wrong and ought to be taken as seriously as if they professed belief in Santa Claus

The first part may indeed be LW manifesto material, and the second part is false for obvious social reasons.

Well, that's why I said "obnoxious". It's like a very arrogant, conceited, straw-man caricature of us (actually, of the New Atheist movement, but we do share a lot of traits), which has some good points but deforms them to the point of them not being valid anymore. I suspect that's the sort of reaction we can get if people read stuff like "Raising The Sanity Waterline" and feel so insulted they won't listen anymore and take everything the wrong way.

Totally behind you on the first paragraph, but I can't quite understand the two last para... (read more)

Beware The Believer, or a study in depth of recursion

by Raw_Power 1 min read30th Jul 201118 comments

3


I submit to the good people of Less Wrong this wonderful video. Is it a parody of scientifism? A parody of creationist parodies of scientifism? How deep does the recursion go? (those who already know, don't spoil the fun for the rest!).