Re: On pretending to be Wise

From: Chris Capel (
Date: Thu Aug 31 2006 - 20:26:19 MDT

On 8/31/06, Russell Wallace <> wrote:
> Of course I can tell the difference between you. He has said little that is
> either true or false. You have said much that is true and much that is
> false. That's why my words to you have been strongly "you've had some good
> ideas, but for God's sake get out of the rut you're in!" and my words to him
> have been "okay, well let's see what you've got."

Loosemore was truly terrible at discussion. Incredibly defensive,
evasive, and gradiloquent. Incapable of charity, incapable of being
succinct, and incapable of directly addressing others' points. Eliezer
was not charitable at all, but that's about the only negative I can
see, and I hesitate to call it a fault or mistake, as charity can be a
waste of time when used to aid cranks. Someone that terrible at
discussion isn't worth having around, no matter what the quality of
their ideas. (I gather Eliezer disagrees, as he only banned Loosemore
when he judged Loosemore to be deliberately or delusionally deceptive,
and he didn't engage Loosemore only because his ideas were poor, not
because his style was obnoxious.)

Chris Capel

"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT