Done.
You're right, but I still think it's the worst. So, I apologize for the click-baitness and I'll try to change it from "The worst post on SSC".
It’s not necessary to introduce Slate Star Codex (SSC, www.slatestarcodex.com) on Less Wrong. I would say that it is probably one of the best blogs on the internet. By chance, I forwarded one of its articles just today.
Yet, some posts have been bugging me (some for months). I hope Less Wrong is the right place to address these and, crucially, to enable a discussion. Please note, even when I am using polemics, I do so in good faith: directed at bad ideas only.
I’ll start with the worst post on SSC, Archipelago and Atomic Communitarianism (http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/06/07/archipelago-and-atomic-communitarianism/). I’m calling it the worst post because it is both wrong and a... (read 1224 more words →)
Actually, the last paragraph is exactly my point. If I am not completely wrong, the Archipelago suggests a utopia, a political state to strife to achieve (at least in part). But you can't draw conclusions about something else, in this case politics. You would have to show that it has meaning, accuracy or transferability for that, however you want to phrase it.
That's why I don't think the word model is right here. For a describtion, a model would be fine, and might help. I don't think the Archipelago is a model in that sense.
EDIT: Let me give you a stupid and arbitrary example. Imagine a world where all dogs are at least 7 feet high, and people still loved dogs. Obviously, with their height, they could potentially be dangerous. Thus, in that world, it would make sense to say that all dogs should undergo mandatory training. But that doesn't follow for our world.