I voted it down because, among rationalists, the value of an idea shouldn’t depend much on the author (although sometimes the author’s identity sheds more light on the quote). I mean, hell, Eliezer found an interesting quote from Piers Anthony.
I agree the value of an idea shouldn’t depend too much on the author if we can evaluate the idea more directly. But I think the value of a quotation, a particular wording of an idea, is more dependent on who authored it.
If I were to use the Moldbug quote above in a positive light I fear how the reader would react:
Readers who like the quote would get a falsely positive impression of the author.
Readers who knew, and didn’t like the author, would slightly lower their assessment of me “even if he is right this time, why does he think Moldbug is an authority?”
I think most people use quotes with the understanding that readers often feel an implicit appeal to authority unless they explicitly state otherwise. Quoting someone also causes readers to perceive the author to be deserving of engagement. I’d rather not reward people I don’t respect in that way.
Maybe I’m weird, but I don’t use or interpret quotes that way (as an appeal to authority). I use quotes that express an idea succinctly or cleverly, and the point for me is the language, not the source. I’m careful not to accidentally imply that the wording is mine, but other than that quotes are pretty independent of their originators in my mind.
(But I do frequently introduce a quote by saying “as someone said” to avoid derailing the conversation to be about that person)
I voted it down because, among rationalists, the value of an idea shouldn’t depend much on the author (although sometimes the author’s identity sheds more light on the quote). I mean, hell, Eliezer found an interesting quote from Piers Anthony.
It’s a very bad habit to let your assessment of a person affect your valuations of isolated remarks to that degree.
I agree the value of an idea shouldn’t depend too much on the author if we can evaluate the idea more directly. But I think the value of a quotation, a particular wording of an idea, is more dependent on who authored it.
If I were to use the Moldbug quote above in a positive light I fear how the reader would react:
Readers who like the quote would get a falsely positive impression of the author.
Readers who knew, and didn’t like the author, would slightly lower their assessment of me “even if he is right this time, why does he think Moldbug is an authority?”
I think most people use quotes with the understanding that readers often feel an implicit appeal to authority unless they explicitly state otherwise. Quoting someone also causes readers to perceive the author to be deserving of engagement. I’d rather not reward people I don’t respect in that way.
Maybe I’m weird, but I don’t use or interpret quotes that way (as an appeal to authority). I use quotes that express an idea succinctly or cleverly, and the point for me is the language, not the source. I’m careful not to accidentally imply that the wording is mine, but other than that quotes are pretty independent of their originators in my mind.
(But I do frequently introduce a quote by saying “as someone said” to avoid derailing the conversation to be about that person)
I agree that the language of a quotation is of utmost importance. Everything you’re saying seems reasonable.