AI ALIGNMENT FORUM
AF

Blues & Greens (metaphor)

v0.2.0Sep 16th 2020 GMT (+4/-5)
v0.1.0Sep 16th 2020 GMT (+134/-158)
v0.0.21Oct 15th 2012 GMT (+7/-7) Typo
v0.0.20Jan 4th 2010 GMT (+1/-1)
v0.0.19Nov 16th 2009 GMT (+1/-85) bylines, cleanup tag
v0.0.18Oct 10th 2009 GMT (+86/-88) correction
v0.0.17Oct 9th 2009 GMT (+7/-180) (that's not why we avoid politics)
v0.0.16Oct 4th 2009 GMT (+8)
v0.0.15Oct 4th 2009 GMT (+783/-13)
v0.0.14Sep 28th 2009 GMT (+75/-75)
Load More (10/24)
Ruby v0.2.0Sep 16th 2020 GMT (+4/-5) LW2
Ruby v0.1.0Sep 16th 2020 GMT (+134/-158) LW2
CronoDAS v0.0.21Oct 15th 2012 GMT (+7/-7) Typo LW2
PeerInfinity v0.0.20Jan 4th 2010 GMT (+1/-1) LW1
Zack_M_Davis v0.0.19Nov 16th 2009 GMT (+1/-85) bylines, cleanup tag LW2
bogus v0.0.18Oct 10th 2009 GMT (+86/-88) correction LW2
Eliezer Yudkowsky v0.0.17Oct 9th 2009 GMT (+7/-180) (that's not why we avoid politics) LW2
bogus v0.0.16Oct 4th 2009 GMT (+8) LW2
bogus v0.0.15Oct 4th 2009 GMT (+783/-13) LW2
PeerInfinity v0.0.14Sep 28th 2009 GMT (+75/-75) LW1
Load More (10/24)
Ruby
Ruby
CronoDAS
Zack_M_Davis
bogus
bogus
bogus
Eliezer Yudkowsky
PeerInfinity
PeerInfinity
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
Discuss this tag(0)
  • The Robbers Cave Experiment by Eliezer Yudkowsky
  • The Two-Party Swindle by Eliezer Yudkowsky
  • A Fable of Science and Politics by Eliezer Yudkowsky
  • Blue or Green on Regulation? by Eliezer Yudkowsky -— Burch's law isn't a soldier-argument for regulation; estimating the appropriate level of regulation in each particular case is a superior third option.

Less Wrong does not concern itself with political disputes, since they raise complex issues which go far beyond our definition of rationality. This can be readily seen by comparingCompare the virtues of rationality with the political virtues identified by Bernard Crick.

Less Wrong does not concern itself with political disputes, since they raise complex issues which go far beyond our definition of rationality. This can be readily seen by comparing the virtues of rationality with the political virtues identified by Bernard Crick.

See also

  • Mind-killer
  • Arguments as soldiers
  • False dilemma
  • In-group bias

Footnotes

See also

  • Mind-killer
  • Arguments as soldiers
  • False dilemma
  • In-group bias

Footnotes

In articles at Overcoming Bias"Blues and Less Wrong, the words "Blues" and "Greens" are oftenGreens" is a term used to metaphorically refer to two opposing political factions.
See also: Tribalism, Mind-killer, Arguments as soldiers, False dilemma, In-group bias

The terms come from the names of chariot racing teams, that differed in nothing but the team colors, but the rivalry of whose fans sometimes reached the level of gang wars.1 By definition, politics also deals with matters that people physically fight over in the real world -- or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly on violence.

Politics commonly involves an adversarial process, where factions usually identify with political positions, and use arguments as soldiers to defend their side. When tempered by appropriate standards of evidence, rules of order and other safeguards, such a process may be the only way of introducing a modicum of deliberative truth truth-seeking and other virtues of rationality into an inherently violent domain. However, the dichotomies presented by the opposing sides are often false dilemmas, which can be shown by presenting third options.

See also

  • Mind-killer
  • Arguments as soldiers
  • False dilemma
  • In-group bias

  1. Wikipedia:Chariot racing#Byzantine era↩ 

For a varieryvariety of reasons, Less Wrong tries to avoid political disputes: see Mind-killer.

The terms come from the names of chariot racing teams, that differed in nothing but the team colors, but rivalry of whose fans sometimes reached the level of gang wars.1 By definition, politics also deals with matters that people physically fight over in the real world -- or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly on violence.

PoliticalPolitics commonly involves an adversarial process, where factions usually identify with political positions, and use arguments as soldiers to defend their side. When tempered by appropriate standards of evidence, rules of order and other safeguards, such a process may be the only way of introducing a modicum of deliberative truth seeking and other virtues of rationality into an inherently violent domain. However, suchthe dichotomies presented by the opposing sides are often false dilemmas, which can be shown by presenting third options.

Less Wrong does not concern itself with political disputes, since they raise complex issues which go far beyond our definition of rationality. This can be seen by comparing the virtues of rationality with the political virtues identified by Bernard Crick.

  • The Robbers Cave Experiment
  • The Two-Party Swindle
  • A Fable of Science and Politics
  • Blue or Green on Regulation? —- Burch's law isn't a soldier-argument for regulation; estimating the appropriate level of regulation in each particular case is a superior third option.

Compare theFor a variery of reasons, Less Wrong tries to avoid political disputes: see virtues of rationality with the political virtues identified by Bernard CrickMind-killer.

The termsterm come from the names of chariot racing teams, that differed in nothing but the team colors, but the rivalry of whose fans sometimes reached the level of gang wars.1 By definition, politics also deals with matters that people physically fight over in the real world -- or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly on violence.