AlexM

Karma: 87

AlexM 11 Apr 2012 0:04 UTC
−9 points
on: Left-wing Alarmism vs. Right-wing Optimism: evidence on which is correct?
Where did you find right wing optimism?

Our nation is dying, while others are multiplying like rabbits. The true faith lies in ruins, while false religions are spreading like wildfire.Our culture is vanishing under flood of Hollywood filth. Our history is smeared and slandered by liberal liars. Our leaders are either corrupt incompetents or willful traitors. The end is near.

When I read and listen to today’s right wing, there is nothing than doom and despair all the time.

AlexM 2 Apr 2012 12:13 UTC
3 points
in reply to: gjm’s comment on: George Orwell’s Prelude on Politics Is The Mind Killer

It seems to me that the US did rather well for itself over those years and the ones that followed, in terms of prosperity and progress and international influence and happiness and just about any other metric you might care to name.

And if you look to policies preferred by the McCarthy and other hardcore cold warriors (WW3 or ceaseless Vietnam and Afgan-like wars all over the world) and value life and well-being of non-Americans, every one of the 205 or 78 or 57 communists on Tailgunner Joe’s list deserved to be awarded Hero of the Soviet Union, together with equivalent awards of all nations of Eurasia.

AlexM 23 Mar 2012 19:49 UTC
3 points
in reply to: Will_Newsome’s comment on: Modest Superintelligences

What? Everyone remembers the Albigensian Crusade. “Kill them all, God will know His own.” And if heretics won’t repent you should expel them or kill them. I agree with the Church on that one. There are demons who would mislead the people, you can’t just let them get away with it. You know what happens when you don’t kill the heretics? Communism. And communism killed way more people than the Church ever did.

I see you are fan of Marx and Weber. If Protestantism leads to capitalism and capitalism leads to communism, it makes sense to strike at the root of the evil.

Unfortunately, one fact kills the theory—in Catholic countries, communism was extremely strong and popular, while in Protestant ones communist parties were nearly nonexistent.

AlexM 23 Mar 2012 19:49 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Will_Newsome’s comment on: Modest Superintelligences

Well, they shouldn’t do it anymore, for obvious reasons. But at that time it was a good idea. The Reformation led to a shift in values and political structures that reached one climax with the French revolution

This is the reason why the French revolution happened in Catholic country that followed your advice and extirpated all heresy without mercy.

AlexM 23 Mar 2012 2:53 UTC
9 points
in reply to: Aurini’s comment on: I’ve had it with those dark rumours about our culture rigorously suppressing opinions

I mean, jeez, have you seen how women behave in the workplace? They crave the occasional spanking.

Indeed, what workplace could be without discipline? Be assured that your boss, just like you, regrets the rotten and degenerate liberal age we are living in and looks forward to the day when he can properly discipline you.

2) Men with guns are always at the ready to take men away who dare discipline their women.

You are stronger than “your women” so you can discipline them at your pleasure. I don’t see why you complain when the men with guns, who are stronger than you, discipline you.

AlexM 23 Mar 2012 2:41 UTC
4 points
on: Global warming is a better test of irrationality that theism
IMHO, the best “test of irrationality” would be acceptance of alternative medicine.

It matters little whether you believe in global warming, but belief in homeopathy, faith healing or anything else that makes you to delay the official thing, will make difference in your life, and not for the better.

AlexM 3 Sep 2011 1:09 UTC
1 point
in reply to: sam0345’s comment on: How likely is Peter Thiel’s investment into seasteading to pay off?
Is there any nation that “rationally and selfishly follows its collective interest”?

AlexM 1 Sep 2011 14:47 UTC
2 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: How likely is Peter Thiel’s investment into seasteading to pay off?
The quote above? Not obviously wrong, just not even wrong and as unfalsifiable as any proper conspiracy theory should be.

Of the “enemy” regimes listed, US went to war only with Nazis and three of them were valued NATO members. One can call Vietnam and Korean wars in a sense limited, because US refused to use nukes and escalate into full WW3.

I wouldn’t comment about Israel, because there is nothing more mind-killing that discussion about Israeli/Palestinian politics :-(

AlexM 30 Aug 2011 8:29 UTC
3 points
in reply to: Kaj_Sotala’s comment on: Book trades with open-minded theists—recommendations?

Sorry, but that sounds like motivated stopping to me. Coming up with ways by which blind evolution and guiding divinity might be compatible isn’t really hard at all.

What is hard is to make compatible evolution and all-loving divinity. To watch how ones creations torment and devour each other for hundreds of millions of years is not exactly my idea of love.

AlexM 30 Aug 2011 8:26 UTC
2 points
in reply to: gjm’s comment on: Book trades with open-minded theists—recommendations?
The argument from metaethics was outdated from the beginning, at least for Christian apologetic purposes. Moral laws of all tribes and civilizations are compatible and are completely opposed to message of Jesus.

Natural law says: love your family. Jesus says: abandon them and follow me. Natural law: love your friends, hate your enemies. Jesus: love everyone. Natural law: defend yourself. Jesus: do not resist. Natural law: defend your property. Jesus: give up everything etc, etc....

AlexM 30 Aug 2011 7:55 UTC
3 points
in reply to: Tesseract’s comment on: Book trades with open-minded theists—recommendations?
Even if ignore all problems ofderiving ought from is, there is problem which parts of nature we are supposed to follow.

If Darwin says “kill them all, the strongest will survive”, then Kelvin would say “kill yourself, why bother waiting to heat death of the universe?”

AlexM 30 Aug 2011 7:42 UTC
4 points
in reply to: sam0345’s comment on: Book trades with open-minded theists—recommendations?

Evolution is no threat to religion.

Evolution, paleontology and geology and biology in general are definitely threat to religion in both forms most popular today—strict Bible/Koran conservative literalist faith and fluffy liberal one.

The first is simply proven wrong—the world was not created in six days, there was no worldwide flood, etc.

And the case for all-loving, all-forgiving god or “spiritual force” is refuted even more decisively.

What is left open is the case for the supreme bastard of the universe, the obssesive-compulsive psychopathic sadist who painstakingly designs 500,000 species of beetles and then watches how they devour each other. ;-)

AlexM 30 Aug 2011 7:24 UTC
0 points
on: Kill the mind-killer
Why would abolition of political parties make politics better? Look at politics before modern democracy and political parties. I personally can’t imagine something more mind-killing than court intrigues in, say, 18th century.

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 20:22 UTC
−2 points
in reply to: ArisKatsaris’s comment on: A funny argument for traditional morality

I can likewise imagine (and could prefer) a scientific civilization that is freely polyamorous, atheistic, Eugenicist, etc.

Scientific civilization that actually understands science of biology would steer clear of eugenics.

For pure pragmatic reasons—breeding better (whatewer value of “better” you choose) humans would last at least several centuries—and the problem is that you do not know what traits would be needed then.

Here is one actual historical example of human breeding. Had Frederick II and other kings of Prussia continued the work, Germany could well have a race of eight foot tall soldiers—just in time for WWI.

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 20:12 UTC
23 points
in reply to: Eliezer Yudkowsky’s comment on: Religion’s Claim to be Non-Disprovable

Why can’t modern Nazis disavow ancient Nazi practice in favor of some true essence that makes sense in modern terms?

One can argue that holocaust denial is an attempt to bring nazism closer to modern ethical values. Real, authentic Nazis were proud of their achievement and would be outraged by thought that their successors would call them a lie.

Why not start your search for the true essence in Lord of the Rings

Some people do :-P

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 19:40 UTC
−2 points
in reply to: Torben’s comment on: Smart, (young), ambitious and clueless—what to do to maximize goodness?
If China is moderate capitalism, one shudders how would extreme one looks like...

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 19:34 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Torben’s comment on: Smart, (young), ambitious and clueless—what to do to maximize goodness?

I’m immensely skeptical of the notion that clever people are needed to tell dumb people what to do to achieve what they want

Every system ever devised consists of smart people telling the dumb ones what to do. Even in feudal society with hereditary rule, the thicker-than-brick kings were manipulated by smart barons and courtiers :-P

Caveat lector: I’m reading Atlas Shrugged right now.

Generalization from fictional evidence

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 19:11 UTC
0 points
in reply to: NancyLebovitz’s comment on: Transsexuals and otherkin
There are also people who feel they are Jewish, but other Jews would probably disagree …

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 19:04 UTC
0 points
in reply to: orthonormal’s comment on: Enhanced brain connectivity in long-term meditation practitioners
Careless downvoting (and upvoting) is something one can expect from new members. Veterans know that voting is serious thing that is done after deep deliberation and soul searching, but for a newbie, it is just click.

Speaking from my own experience (not that I would dare to call myself veteran)

AlexM 16 Jul 2011 18:56 UTC
2 points
on: My true rejection
For pure pragmatic reasons, peaceful methods would be still preferable to violent ones…

Why Terrorism Does Not Work

This is the first article to analyze a large sample of terrorist groups in terms of their policy effectiveness. It includes every foreign terrorist organization (FTO) designated by the U.S. Department of State since 2001. The key variable for FTO success is a tactical one: target selection. Terrorist groups whose attacks on civilian targets outnumber attacks on military targets do not tend to achieve their policy objectives, regardless of their nature. Contrary to the prevailing view that terrorism is an effective means of political coercion, the universe of cases suggests that, first, contemporary terrorist groups rarely achieve their policy objectives and, second, the poor success rate is inherent to the tactic of terrorism itself. The bulk of the article develops a theory for why countries are reluctant to make policy concessions when their civilian populations are the primary target.