X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fchallenges-notes.md;h=49f2644bd98b305226a60b61f40fb0a4d30ad683;hp=977f09cc64077c1b5bbe02f4a4d50acbaa697344;hb=4af0fcebb33d8a007f6357de5fbb0ad7ab5ad3f5;hpb=1c77c7aa477239610a49c15a4bda24fa8e25b74b diff --git a/notes/challenges-notes.md b/notes/challenges-notes.md index 977f09c..49f2644 100644 --- a/notes/challenges-notes.md +++ b/notes/challenges-notes.md @@ -1,22 +1,25 @@ Fit in somewhere— +For "Challenges" proper— + + * transition interventions are bundled: asking for pronouns could only plausibly be a good idea if coupled with further interventions—but that's not the picture we'd get if we took Yudkowsky literally + * I need to acknowledge the +> In a wide variety of cases, sure, they can clearly communicate the unambiguous sex and gender of something that has an unambiguous sex and gender, much as a different language might have pronouns that sometimes clearly communicated hair color to the extent that hair color often fell into unambiguous clusters. + * maybe by "much more strongly ... different firm attachments", he's pointing to different people having different intuitions about what male/female clusters map to; that's definitely a thing, but it's wrong to conflate that with "Maybe it's like not being named Oliver"; people do agree on the approximate meaning of blue and green even if there are edge cases, cite fallacy of gray * singular they for named individuals undermined indefinite singular 'they' - * some people have complained that my writing is too long, but when your interlocutors will go to the absurd length of _denying that the association of "she" with females_ * people have an incentive to fight over pronouns insofar as it's a "wedge" for more substantive issues - * appeal to inner privacy conversation-halter https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wqmmv6NraYv4Xoeyj/conversation-halters * don't use "baked in" so many times * Aella https://knowingless.com/2019/06/06/side-effects-of-preferred-pronouns/ - * "gamete size"—this is a tic where everyone knows what sex is, but no one is allowed to acknowledge the cluster * maybe worth explaining why I keep saying "sex category" instead of "gender"—and be consistent about it - * transition interventions are bundled: asking for pronouns could only plausibly be a good idea if coupled with further interventions—but that's not the picture we'd get if we took Yudkowsky literally - * this post needs to exist because I can't let him have the last word - * I need to acknowledge the -> In a wide variety of cases, sure, they can clearly communicate the unambiguous sex and gender of something that has an unambiguous sex and gender, much as a different language might have pronouns that sometimes clearly communicated hair color to the extent that hair color often fell into unambiguous clusters. - * maybe by "much more strongly ... different firm attachments", he's pointing to different people having different intuitions about what male/female clusters map to; that's definitely a thing, but it's wrong to conflate that with "Maybe it's like not being named Oliver"; people do agree on the approximate meaning of blue and green even if there are edge cases, cite fallacy of gray +4 levels of intellectual conversation https://rationalconspiracy.com/2017/01/03/four-layers-of-intellectual-conversation/ +For postscript— + * some people have complained that my writing is too long, but when your interlocutors will go to the absurd length of _denying that the association of "she" with females_ + * appeal to inner privacy conversation-halter https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wqmmv6NraYv4Xoeyj/conversation-halters + * "gamete size"—this is a tic where everyone knows what sex is, but no one is allowed to acknowledge the cluster + * this post needs to exist because I can't let him have the last word * need introductory sentence before first reference to "we" or "the community" - * it is merited to touch on the nearest-unblocked strategy history somewhere in this piece, even if I may also need to write a longer "A Hill of Validity" * also need a short statement of what I'm fighting for (AGPs are factually not women, and a culture that insists that everyone needs to lie to protect our feelings is bad for our own intellectual development; I want the things I said in "Sexual Dimorphism" to be the standard story, rather than my weird heresy) @@ -26,7 +29,7 @@ Fit in somewhere— * I'm only doing what _he_ taught me to do -4 levels of intellectual conversation https://rationalconspiracy.com/2017/01/03/four-layers-of-intellectual-conversation/ + > I find the "(chromosomes?)" here very amusing. I am also a Yudkowskian, Eliezer; "female human" is a cluster in thingspace :) https://twitter.com/EnyeWord/status/1068983389716385792