I personally simply copied the wording in the article above and wanted to test whether the claim is true. It seems indeed to be the case that there are a bunch of people who consider the statement about “truth” more heretical than “information”.
I don’t know how ChristianKl meant it, but in general it appears to mean either (1) “this idea is so utterly false that it must be strenuously opposed every time it rears its head”, or (2) “the crowd say that this idea is so utterly false that it must be opposed every time it rears its head, therefore I shall defiantly proclaim it to demonstrate my superior intellect”.
The very concept of “heresy” presupposes that arguments are soldiers and disagreement is strife. “Heresy” is a call to war, not a call to truth.
The first and third ones, about info sometimes being worthless, just made me think of Vaniver’s article on value of information calculations. So, I mean, it sounded very LessWrongy to me, very much the kind of thing you’d hear here.
The second one made me think of nuclear secrets, which made me think of HPMOR. Again, it seems like the kind of thing that this community would recognize the value of.
I think my reactions to these were biased, though, by being told how I was expected to feel about them. I always like to subvert that, and feel a little proud of myself when what I’m reading fails to describe me.
Edit: For the following clicking agree is supposed to mean that you consider a statement heretical
“Some truths don’t matter much.” sounds heretical [pollid:691]
“People often have legitimate reasons for not wanting others to have certain truths.” sounds heretical [pollid:692]
“The value of truth often has to be weighed against other goals.” sounds heretical [pollid:693]
“Information can be perfectly accurate and also worthless.” sounds heretical [pollid:694]
“People often have legitimate reasons for not wanting other people to gain access to their private information. ” sounds heretical [pollid:695]
“A desire for more information often has to be weighed against other goals.” sounds heretical [pollid:696]
What is meant by heretical?
I personally simply copied the wording in the article above and wanted to test whether the claim is true. It seems indeed to be the case that there are a bunch of people who consider the statement about “truth” more heretical than “information”.
I don’t know how ChristianKl meant it, but in general it appears to mean either (1) “this idea is so utterly false that it must be strenuously opposed every time it rears its head”, or (2) “the crowd say that this idea is so utterly false that it must be opposed every time it rears its head, therefore I shall defiantly proclaim it to demonstrate my superior intellect”.
The very concept of “heresy” presupposes that arguments are soldiers and disagreement is strife. “Heresy” is a call to war, not a call to truth.
So if we have a heresy, then exposing it as actually true would be good, because we want to know the truth—hang on.
The first and third ones, about info sometimes being worthless, just made me think of Vaniver’s article on value of information calculations. So, I mean, it sounded very LessWrongy to me, very much the kind of thing you’d hear here.
The second one made me think of nuclear secrets, which made me think of HPMOR. Again, it seems like the kind of thing that this community would recognize the value of.
I think my reactions to these were biased, though, by being told how I was expected to feel about them. I always like to subvert that, and feel a little proud of myself when what I’m reading fails to describe me.