On the object-level topic of Said Achmiz, I have said all I care about, and I shall say no more. But there are deeper philosophical disagreements underlying the object level, which you correctly point to in your second-to-last paragraph. In fact, reading point number 2 in that paragraph reminded me of this classic and critical excerpt of Eliezer’s writing in the Preface to the new Sequences:
I thought, and still do think, that there is an unfortunate problem wherein treating ideas courteously is processed by many people on some level as “Nothing bad will happen to me if I say I believe this; I won’t lose status if I say I believe in homeopathy,” and that derisive laughter by comedians can help people wake up from the dream.
I believe that saying someone’s argument or belief is Obvious Nonsense and can be dismissed because it’s already been conclusively addressed in a dozen posts in the Sequences, and using these exact words to say it,[1] seems to me like an absolutely pro-social and frankly necessary part of maintaining epistemic hygiene in a truth-seeking community.
As opposed to, as a hopefully-relevant example, the EA Forum college-campus-style “we are all friends and you are super smart and I will do anything to avoid offending you and I will acknowledge all your emotions as valid, while trying my hardest to find an angle from which our disagreement disappears instead of addressing any of your actual points”
On the object-level topic of Said Achmiz, I have said all I care about, and I shall say no more. But there are deeper philosophical disagreements underlying the object level, which you correctly point to in your second-to-last paragraph. In fact, reading point number 2 in that paragraph reminded me of this classic and critical excerpt of Eliezer’s writing in the Preface to the new Sequences:
I believe that saying someone’s argument or belief is Obvious Nonsense and can be dismissed because it’s already been conclusively addressed in a dozen posts in the Sequences, and using these exact words to say it,[1] seems to me like an absolutely pro-social and frankly necessary part of maintaining epistemic hygiene in a truth-seeking community.
As opposed to, as a hopefully-relevant example, the EA Forum college-campus-style “we are all friends and you are super smart and I will do anything to avoid offending you and I will acknowledge all your emotions as valid, while trying my hardest to find an angle from which our disagreement disappears instead of addressing any of your actual points”
(I agree with all this and think this is a value that Said provides.)