I'm pretty sure that was a joke, but of the type that manages to reinforce the sentiment behind the joke, so I'm still up for the sneering.
As someone who left (hyper) rationalism and has found a balanced spiritual worldview, I cringe at the over-intellectualized takes which completely miss the heart of these mystical concepts.
It's a joke. "Nothing is ever a coincidence" is a quote from his fantasy book inspired by Jewish mystical motifs, especially names of God having power over the world, and Kabbalah numerology.
The idea is ridiculous as a comparison. The entire concept is that these are humble people who are exemplars of human good and righteous and unknown to the public (since anyone going around claiming to be so righteous that G-d would kill mankind were it not for them would have to be pretty vain, so couldn't be among their number). Sometimes in mystic traditions they, being close to G-d, have mystic powers and might momentarily reveal themselves to lead people to righteousness and whatnot, but the concept is as far removed from a bunch of fart-sniffers preaching philosophy from privileged positions as one can imagine.
it's the literal definition of neurosis in psychoanalysis: the anxiety of constantly having to maneuver oneself in order to placate Big Other, and the futile pursuit of a mastery that the Other ensures can never be attained.
Judaism has a thing where certain names of God are considered sacred and either not to be spoken/written at all, or only done in certain circumstances (and requiring certain ritual ways of disposing them, can't just throw away a piece of paper with one of the sacred names written on it)
This lead to various religious people using different names for god. Eg. "The name" instead of the actual Tetragrammaton. Over time because of a kind of euphemism treadmill some of those names have become too sacred to use. G-d instead of "God" is a line in that treadmill.
Jewish thing, not taking the lord’s name in vain. Although “God” isn’t technically a sacred name in Judaism some see it as bad taste to write any of god’s names fully as they’re considered to have power.
Interestingly, in the 18th and 19th century, you would see English novelists and journalists writing "G-d" instead of the full name, for similar reasons -- so it's like, the very opposite of a Gen Z thing.
Oh Lord. “The natural English translation of lamed vavnik is ‘LWer.’ This is not a coincidence because nothing is ever a coincidence.”
That’s a … crazy thing to believe. It’s like Nash’s bulletin board in A Beautiful Mind. OF COURSE this is just a coincidence. And one half of the coincidence (religious sages who sustain the world by existing) isn’t even real.
Isn’t he a psychiatrist??? WTF does it even mean to be a “rationalist” at this point?
Was he not being facetious with that "no coincidence" comment? I can't tell anymore and I have zero patience to stay engaged with rationalist textual diarrhea.
It's a joke, just an incredibly self-aggrandizing one. He once wrote an entire novel ("Unsong") facetiously ascribing mystical significance to these kinds of puns and language games.
"no coincidence" is a facile expression in the rationalist lingo. It can stand for its meaning, when the conclusion fits their pre-made narrative. Otherwise, it could stand facetiously as its opposite meaning, to discard a conclusion they would not like.
Feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading these comments. Everybody here thinking he seriously thinks there's a correlation is nuts and is really bad at detecting an obvious joke. It's also typical Scott humor.
A lot of rationalist humor and fiction is cover for more serious ideas. Like “wouldn’t it be funny if [insert low quality joke that actually gestures at idea rationalist wants to get at]”. Or dath Ilan, a fiction/worldbuilding exercise where Eliezer quite seriously goes on about what an ideal society would be like that has loads of repugnant and questionable ideas like ubiquitous eugenics or a priest-class or uberrationalists, the Keepers.
I agree with you in the general sense, but are you saying here that what Scott is really getting at is that LWers are holy people of god? That's what he really believes?
This subreddit has become just a snark subreddit. These people aren't interested in actually criticizing the ideas, they're interested in ridiculous bad faith interpretations like this.
"Yes, maybe he's making a joke, but actually it's bad because [inane generalization]..."
So the guy who is part of the team that came up with the first arguably truly random numbers through quantum computing says nothing is ever a coincidence?
I'm pretty sure that was a joke, but of the type that manages to reinforce the sentiment behind the joke, so I'm still up for the sneering.
As someone who left (hyper) rationalism and has found a balanced spiritual worldview, I cringe at the over-intellectualized takes which completely miss the heart of these mystical concepts.
It's a joke. "Nothing is ever a coincidence" is a quote from his fantasy book inspired by Jewish mystical motifs, especially names of God having power over the world, and Kabbalah numerology.
The concept for that book was a fun silly hypothetical, but man he does not know how to write actual characters and plot.
I guess there's no strict requirement that jokes be funny. Definitely comes across as a serious take to the casual observer.
There's definitely no requirements for jokes to please the casual observer, most don't
The idea is ridiculous as a comparison. The entire concept is that these are humble people who are exemplars of human good and righteous and unknown to the public (since anyone going around claiming to be so righteous that G-d would kill mankind were it not for them would have to be pretty vain, so couldn't be among their number). Sometimes in mystic traditions they, being close to G-d, have mystic powers and might momentarily reveal themselves to lead people to righteousness and whatnot, but the concept is as far removed from a bunch of fart-sniffers preaching philosophy from privileged positions as one can imagine.
The idea that people would have to justify their existence to their creator is so fucked up.
it's the literal definition of neurosis in psychoanalysis: the anxiety of constantly having to maneuver oneself in order to placate Big Other, and the futile pursuit of a mastery that the Other ensures can never be attained.
genuinely curious - why spell it G-d instead of God? is this like a gen Z thing?
Judaism has a thing where certain names of God are considered sacred and either not to be spoken/written at all, or only done in certain circumstances (and requiring certain ritual ways of disposing them, can't just throw away a piece of paper with one of the sacred names written on it)
This lead to various religious people using different names for god. Eg. "The name" instead of the actual Tetragrammaton. Over time because of a kind of euphemism treadmill some of those names have become too sacred to use. G-d instead of "God" is a line in that treadmill.
Jewish thing, not taking the lord’s name in vain. Although “God” isn’t technically a sacred name in Judaism some see it as bad taste to write any of god’s names fully as they’re considered to have power.
I mean the idea is that there are rules about using proper names. So there is a question about if it applies to translations, and the general answer is "better to assume it does to be safe and make sure we don't break any rules")
As others said, Jew thing. Here is Chabad's discussion of the reasoning. I am not religious, but it was a habit that was drilled into me. Nothing to do with Gen Z.
Interestingly, in the 18th and 19th century, you would see English novelists and journalists writing "G-d" instead of the full name, for similar reasons -- so it's like, the very opposite of a Gen Z thing.
Oh Lord. “The natural English translation of lamed vavnik is ‘LWer.’ This is not a coincidence because nothing is ever a coincidence.”
That’s a … crazy thing to believe. It’s like Nash’s bulletin board in A Beautiful Mind. OF COURSE this is just a coincidence. And one half of the coincidence (religious sages who sustain the world by existing) isn’t even real.
Isn’t he a psychiatrist??? WTF does it even mean to be a “rationalist” at this point?
Was he not being facetious with that "no coincidence" comment? I can't tell anymore and I have zero patience to stay engaged with rationalist textual diarrhea.
It's a joke, just an incredibly self-aggrandizing one. He once wrote an entire novel ("Unsong") facetiously ascribing mystical significance to these kinds of puns and language games.
Oh thank God. I’m no Alexander fan but wouldn’t wish psychosis on anyone. And this would not be the craziest thing to emerge from “rationalism
"no coincidence" is a facile expression in the rationalist lingo. It can stand for its meaning, when the conclusion fits their pre-made narrative. Otherwise, it could stand facetiously as its opposite meaning, to discard a conclusion they would not like.
I hope so! It’s hard to tell
Jesse what the fuck
I like to think that if I was this self-important about my subculture, even as a joke, you would have to waterboard it out of me.
Anyone else want to try to claim that these people are atheists?
looks like none of you read Unsong
I did!
You guys really can't spot a joke?
"This is not a coincidence because nothing is ever a coincidence" is the obvious tell.
It's just a funny coincidence.
Funny haha or funny weird?
Jokes often conceal a bit of truth. The joke never would have occurred to someone who wasn’t absolutely over the moon on their own farts
This is a quote from that story Siskind wrote where he butchered Judaism.
And I don't get this joke. Can you explain it to me?
It's barely a joke:
Lamed Vavniks can be abreviated as LV,
V makes the same sound as W, so it's LW,
they're a group of people, so you could call them LWers.
"That's the same thing we call our group -- it's like we were prophesied in the bible!"
Feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading these comments. Everybody here thinking he seriously thinks there's a correlation is nuts and is really bad at detecting an obvious joke. It's also typical Scott humor.
A lot of rationalist humor and fiction is cover for more serious ideas. Like “wouldn’t it be funny if [insert low quality joke that actually gestures at idea rationalist wants to get at]”. Or dath Ilan, a fiction/worldbuilding exercise where Eliezer quite seriously goes on about what an ideal society would be like that has loads of repugnant and questionable ideas like ubiquitous eugenics or a priest-class or uberrationalists, the Keepers.
I agree with you in the general sense, but are you saying here that what Scott is really getting at is that LWers are holy people of god? That's what he really believes?
No, he’s saying they are a special elite that see the world in a special way, which is in fact the standard lesswrong claim.
Fair enough!
This subreddit has become just a snark subreddit. These people aren't interested in actually criticizing the ideas, they're interested in ridiculous bad faith interpretations like this.
"Yes, maybe he's making a joke, but actually it's bad because [inane generalization]..."
According to the rules, that is what a sneer is; seriousposting is discouraged.
Of course this is a joke, but AI believers still think they are summoning a god and ascribe mystical properties to the people building it.
"Rules: This is a loungeroom, not debate club. Moderation is to this end."
Yeah, but find something the asshats say that's worth sneering about -- not someone making a joke.
As you said yourself, it's barely even a joke. And it's more of an ingroup cheer than a joke.
Anyways, you seem lost.
So the guy who is part of the team that came up with the first arguably truly random numbers through quantum computing says nothing is ever a coincidence?
Next someone will apply the "Bible Code" technique to HPMOR.
I had Scott pegged as somewhat of an anti-Semite. I'm sure I've read an article that gave some pretty persuasive arguments for it.
Anyway, he does often selectively pick things he likes to back up his ridiculous positions. I guess this is a case of that.
Scott, an anti-Semite? The guy who consistently writes about his Jewish culture and who has a published novel about rabbis and yahweh?
i had no idea....
I'm guessing you've missed the stuff he's written about Ashkenazi IQ because he's closer to being a Jewish supremacist than an antisemite.
His real last name is Siskind.
ahh, i had no idea