Nebton's Blog

Nebton Commented on Milgram, "just following orders", and compassion by Nebton

2009-05-15T12:31:48Z

I had never considered that they might be thinking that the learner could just walk away. Of course, the Sheridan/King variation I mentioned above suggests that, at least for non-humans, they'll kill even when they know the subject can't walk away. Also, I'm skeptical that many of them would have thought that through. Consider me egotistical because I'm basing my skepticism on the fact that I hadn't considered it, even after being aware of the experiment for some time now, whereas they were just introduced to it.

I think you also make a valid point that this particular "following orders" was in the heat of the moment, and that possibly after having a chance to think about it, they would have refused to follow orders a day later. I think the weeping, however, has more to do with them realizing that they "failed a test" of their morality. Maybe I'm just a cynical SOB, though.

I don't mean to nitpick Milgram to death…

Please do. It's criticism I hadn't heard before, and it makes me think. I don't do that nearly often enough. :)

Nebton Commented on Milgram, "just following orders", and compassion by Nebton

2009-05-14T19:45:10Z

Of course Milgram was relatively controlled conditions and "no limits" means the study didn't take it to the limit.

It was controlled conditions, but the subjects didn't know that. As far as they knew, they actually killed the subject on the other end… and then they continued to apply shocks. In fact, the Milgram experiment would violate psychology's ethical standards of today for demonstrating just how much evil we are capable of. (That's my take on the "why", at least—it's really disconcerting to the individuals involved to realize what they would have done had the experiment not been controlled.) See also the Sheridan/King variation mentioned at the end of the Wikipedia article. I was unaware of this follow-up experiment until posting this.

Nebton recommended Milgram, "just following orders", and compassion by Nebton

2009-05-14T16:39:16Z

Nebton recommended Carrie Prejean: Are Progressives Becoming as Intolerant as Conservatives? by Wattree

2009-05-08T01:57:05Z

Nebton Commented on Playing show and tell by David Seaton

2009-05-08T13:27:24Z

I started using Skype's video functionality recently, and in addition to showing you who you're talking to, it also shows a small picture of how you appear to them. I've also been dismayed by all of my nervous habits.

Also, as far as Berliner humor goes, that's actually one of the funniest examples I've seen of it.

Nebton recommended America at Its Best by Purple State

2009-05-03T22:16:15Z

Nebton Commented on GOP Pollster Fires Back At Stan Greenberg by Eric Kleefeld

2009-05-04T20:20:50Z

Well, to be fair to Mr. Ayers, it's entirely plausible that he does believe "they've done a pretty good job representing the Democratic point of view."

And…

We should let them continue to delude themselves if that's the case. (Which I suppose is the reason the "open letter" went to the public, and not to the pollster. Who cares if the pollster gets it, but we don't want to let push-polls go unanswered.)

Nebton Commented on Color This Purple - And Keep it Away From Children by Ramona

2009-05-04T19:26:17Z

(But this thread is already on Google's page one under Rapture Coloring Books!)

That's what my #8 was referring to. This thread was #8 on the search when I Googled. As for the raptureponies, I was under no illusion that it was for real, although it's not always easy to tell! ;)

Nebton Commented on Color This Purple - And Keep it Away From Children by Ramona

2009-05-04T18:17:42Z

I was pretty sure they existed as well, but a quick Google suggests otherwise. I did find this, however. Also, this page is currently #8 on a search for "rapture coloring book".

Nebton Commented on C6-H12-O6 by Donal

2009-05-01T17:05:26Z

Just an aside: processed sugarless foods aren't typically any healthier, and are often even worse for you.

Nebton Commented on Inhofe: Specter's Switch Is "First Visible Evidence" Of GOP Comeback! by Eric Kleefeld

2009-04-29T19:25:03Z

I came here fully expecting to find an "idiotic" comment. I was pleasant surprised that you were an instigator.

Nebton Commented on Ten Magical Things You Have to Believe to be A Republican by The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve

2009-04-29T18:18:13Z

It is a pretty awesome site. I encourage every one to visit it. I'm still not sure if it's satire, but if it is, it's brilliant. It's one of those that even after you look at it a little bit, and click on some of the links, you're still not sure if it's satire (seriously).

Whether or not it's satire, it's an excellent commentary on the state of a certain segment of the population.

Nebton Commented on Historian Michele Bachmann Blames FDR's "Hoot-Smalley" Tariffs For Great Depression by Eric Kleefeld

2009-04-29T17:08:55Z

My sister died trying to create such a list.

Not funny, not cool.

Nebton Commented on Vegetarians Exposed: Anti-Jesus, Anti-American, Bestiality Crazed & Building Momentum. (Proof of Deviancy Far Deeper than Meatlessness!) by kalakitty17

2009-04-27T20:10:40Z

Here's the link in pure form:
http://www.healthyplace.com/eating-disorders/main/vegetarian-or-anorexic/menu-id-58/

The claim is that many anorexic teenagers pretend to be vegetarian in order to hide their eating disorder. It does sound plausible.

(P.S. I'm a pescetarian. In addition to unholy fruits and vegetables, I also eat fish, especially Jesus-fish.)

Nebton Commented on Vegetarians Exposed: Anti-Jesus, Anti-American, Bestiality Crazed & Building Momentum. (Proof of Deviancy Far Deeper than Meatlessness!) by kalakitty17

2009-04-27T19:58:50Z

But wait, there's more: evidently, being a vegetarian might just be a sign that you're really anorexic.

Nebton Commented on Buchanan: Nicaraguan Leader Is "Scrub Stock" by Zachary Roth

2009-04-27T16:33:36Z

You're absolutely right, but… you're doing it, too. (* rim shot *)

I.e., you're "defending" Buchanan by saying "Obama's doing it, too".

Nebton Commented on Steve Sailer: A Contemporary Racist Exposed by Jade7243

2009-04-24T19:37:02Z

Evidently you didn't read the volumes she said above where she made very reasoned arguments laying out what makes him a racist. If you did read it, you'd have to be pretty thick not to understand them, so I hope it's just that you never bothered to read them.

Nebton Commented on Rand/Thrasymachus, Marx, and Dostoyevsky by Nebton

2009-04-24T16:45:17Z

And who would fund the legal recourse against it? A voluntarily funded government would be inherently unstable and would either collapse to anarchy or transform to plutocracy.

Nebton recommended American Hegemony: What is it, Where is it going, and Who really cares anyway? by ☠enghis

2009-04-24T01:07:19Z

Nebton Commented on Rand/Thrasymachus, Marx, and Dostoyevsky by Nebton

2009-04-24T14:03:32Z

First, thanks for the comments. They are appreciated.

Rand's Objectivist ethics is the opposite of Thrasymachus' in the Republic.

As I said above, I've misrepresented her theory, but I think that putting it into practice results in essentially the same thing. (Specifically, the bit about voluntary funding of the government.)

Also, factually, she never claimed that warnings on cigarettes were a "socialist conspiracy"--she had contempt for conspiracy theories, and she viewed government regulation of business as fascist not socialist (since the latter means nationalization of the means of production).

This is just what I read in The Week (along with the bit about dying from lung cancer). I cannot defend it beyond that, and have no intention to, as it was just a throw away comment (and arguably ad hominem.)

Oh, one more thing: since you mention Matson, whom I taught with in '84 (a course on Objectivism at UC Berkeley), he would not, I think, endorse ranking Rand with Thrasymachus.

Awesome. I'm really enjoying his book right now. I find it easy to read. In no way do I intend to imply that he shares my opinion about Rand (if he mentions Rand in the book, I haven't gotten to it yet). It's just that I am currently reading his book, and when I read the bit about Thrasymachus, it really reminded me of Rand, so I wrote this posting, mainly off the top of my head, so I hope you will forgive the inaccuracies. I still believe, after reading the entries here and at Dagblog, that the logical extrapolation of her philosophical theories would result in a world very much as Thrasymachus would want it. With people voluntarily funding government, I find it difficult to believe that the rich would not manipulate it even more than they already do.
As Genghis posted over at Dagblog, The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy arrived at the same conclusion that I did (so my ideas aren't original, either).

Nebton Commented on Rand/Thrasymachus, Marx, and Dostoyevsky by Nebton

2009-04-24T13:12:53Z

You're absolutely right that I've misrepresented her literal theoretical arguments. See what I've written below, however, about how I see those theoretical arguments being put into practice to have the opposite effect of what they intend. (Just like Marx's ideas in practice don't have the effect that he intended.)

Nebton Commented on Rand/Thrasymachus, Marx, and Dostoyevsky by Nebton

2009-04-24T13:10:17Z

You're right that I completely misrepresented her theoretical arguments. I was substituting my logical extrapolation of her arguments for the arguments themselves, and that was sloppy of me.

Here's something she wrote in "The Virtue of Selfishness":

In a fully free society, taxation—or, to be exact, payment for governmental services—would be voluntary. Since the proper services of a government—the police, the armed forces, the law courts—are demonstrably needed by individual citizens and affect their interests directly, the citizens would (and should) be willing to pay for such services, as they pay for insurance.

What happens when payment for governmental services becomes voluntary? Those "private governments" that she (rightly) eschews, since those who control the purse strings will ultimately decide how that money is spent (e.g., to decide which laws are enforced and in what manner). Her theories just don't seem very well thought out, in my opinion.