Sorted by New

Wiki Contributions


To clarify, I was entirely replying to Dagon. I have no quarrel with your post itself in the slightest.

It is a false dilemma, but the Super Happies won't give you one half without the other, I fear.

I think rather a lot of people view it as a means of reproduction first and foremost, and may even attempt to ignore the pleasure.

Eliezer may think so, but I have feeling that this is at least partially foreshadowing a disconnect between these future humans' values and our own.

This comment, archaeologically excavated in the future, amuses me.

And at the same time, they were both victims, as are we all, of human nature. Never let it be said that if you are a victim, you are only a victim.

They've done a really good job of making it a pejorative. Anything's a slur if you hate them enough.

I mean, charitably speaking, I imagine that the second-to-last paragraph could easily have been an argument from consequences, rather than rape apology.

The parable doesn't really characterize the boy as right, rather as desperate. I don't think that it's unreasonable to make an argument that some rapists are desperate for sex, nor that if fewer men were desperate for sex, there'd be less rape. Not saying it's true necessarily, but that it's at least arguable. That doesn't mean women should be forced into sex, of course, but it could still be true at the same time that there would be less rape if men weren't so desperate.

Maybe it's because I identify with the boy to an extent, but I don't think that this is really a moral piece, rather an emotional piece. This is the boy's journey, his perception. I'm sure that it could describe many people reasonably accurately. I will note that the author narrates, but does not pass judgement through narration, only characters.

I think that some people here might be having so much trouble with this because they think that feeling bad for the boy means that women should be forced to have sex, and resent being forced to agree one way or the other. This is a wrong question.

  • You can feel sorry for the boy and not condone the second-to-last paragraph, whether it actually symbolized rape or not

  • You can feel sorry for the boy, even if you don't think it would be wrong for him to never "have the branch lifted"

  • You can feel sorry for the boy and still condemn any other part of this story

Reasonable responses:

  • "I wish you didn't have to feel that way."

  • "I feel sorry for you, but that doesn't mean I will have sex with you."

  • "I feel sorry for you, but that doesn't justify rape."

There are a lot of false dichotomies of blame to fall into here, especially given that this is a parable, and a highly charged one at that. Please try to avoid them.

To the people who suggest that one finds other ways of coping, I look forward to you putting your money where your mouth is and being celibate for 20-40 years to show us the way. While this is a decidedly less black and white topic than most minority disputes, the idea that a member of the outgroup should claim to know the experience of the ingroup better than the ingroup is one that is a very common (and incredibly rude) fallacy, so I should certainly hope that no one falls for that trap, especially if you are part of another minority.

Pretty sure that the average IQ on LessWrong is above the mean, though. Therefore, a group with higher variance is more likely to have member in LessWrong.

The causality of that statement is atrocious, but I think the overall picture should still come through.

The first rule of Transfiguration: you do not guess.

Harry proposed a hypothesis, but no further testing was committed. Without knowledge of PT, I'd rate the inability to transfigure all air (as a conceptually-singular entity) as an equally (or more) probable explanation.

Load More