Paul Graham’s Disagreement Hierarchy Wednesday, May 28 2008
rationality 10:38 pm
For the reasoning behind this, read “How to Disagree”.
Categories:
- AI (66)
- anthropics (3)
- bioethics (4)
- biology (10)
- brain (9)
- chemistry (3)
- comics (4)
- cryonics (3)
- cybernetics (2)
- events (8)
- friendly ai (35)
- futurism (45)
- images (29)
- intelligence (12)
- interviews (12)
- life extension (18)
- lifeboat (8)
- meta (28)
- nanotechnology (62)
- nuclear (3)
- philosophy (25)
- physics (8)
- random (33)
- rationality (2)
- religion (4)
- risks (77)
- robotics (16)
- science (3)
- SIAI (2)
- singularity (75)
- space (26)
- superintelligence (4)
- technology (36)
- transhumanism (110)
- treaties (2)
- videos (9)
- warfare (2)
- web 2.0 (12)
Monthly:
- November 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (4)
- September 2008 (15)
- August 2008 (14)
- June 2008 (17)
- May 2008 (59)
- April 2008 (31)
- March 2008 (45)
- February 2008 (27)
- January 2008 (3)
- December 2007 (5)
- November 2007 (7)
- October 2007 (30)
- September 2007 (18)
- August 2007 (11)
- July 2007 (24)
- June 2007 (20)
- May 2007 (23)
- April 2007 (27)
- March 2007 (29)
- February 2007 (11)
- January 2007 (26)
- December 2006 (22)
- November 2006 (44)
- October 2006 (27)
- September 2006 (28)
- August 2006 (39)
- July 2006 (9)
- June 2006 (6)
- May 2006 (9)
- April 2006 (6)
- March 2006 (9)
- February 2006 (3)
- January 2006 (16)
RSS Feeds:
Technorati:
Email Michael:
May 29th, 2008 at 11:23 am
M: Oh look, this isn’t an argument.
A: Yes it is.
M: No it isn’t. It’s just contradiction.
A: No it isn’t.
M: It is!
A: It is not.
M: Look, you just contradicted me.
A: I did not.
M: Oh you did!!
A: No, no, no.
M: You did just then.
A: Nonsense!
M: Oh, this is futile!
A: No it isn’t.
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn’t; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn’t just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can’t. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn’t.
M: Yes it is! It’s not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that’s not just saying ‘No it isn’t.’
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn’t!
- Monty Python “Arguement Sketch”
May 29th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Paul Graham? He scammed Yahoo into buying a broken, by his own admission, piece of junk software product Viaweb.
Consider the source.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Well done, Randy!
May 30th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
you’re an ass-hat. Fucking awesome word that is.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I think I just experienced every one of these on one of your previous posts, Michael. I may have been guilty of a couple… :-O
By the way, thanks for the closing remark which totally summed up what I was saying!
Peace, bro…Hope all is well.
May 31st, 2008 at 9:14 am
I will quote this often on digg.
May 31st, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Michael - I wonder if you’ve misrepresented DH5 slightly. Specifically, you say that, at DH5, you “find the mistake” and refute it. I would phrase this as, you “find a mistake” and refute it.
If you actually find and refute “the mistake” then you’re up at DH6, aren’t you?
June 1st, 2008 at 10:18 am
you’re an ass-hat. Fucking awesome word that is.
This was funny/new circa 2002.
June 5th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
“Paul Graham? He scammed Yahoo into buying a broken, by his own admission, piece of junk software product Viaweb.
Consider the source.”
Congratulations you went straight for number two from the bottom “ad-hominem”
June 6th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
You forgot Godwin’s layer.