Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Analysis / ThreeWorldsCollide

Go To

OR

Changed: 11

Removed: 31

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And '[[BoldlyComing communicate]]' with, being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".

to:

But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And '[[BoldlyComing communicate]]' with, being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".
"Literature/ThreeWorldsCollide".



----
Back to ThreeWorldsCollide.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'Normal Ending' was better than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that Creator/EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the former is more compelling than the latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?

to:

One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" "Literature/ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'Normal Ending' was better than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that Creator/EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the former is more compelling than the latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


The Lord Pilot doesn't want to be a wirehead. I suspect this is EliezerYudkowsky's ''point'', that preferences don't have to be simplified.

to:

The Lord Pilot doesn't want to be a wirehead. I suspect this is EliezerYudkowsky's Creator/EliezerYudkowsky's ''point'', that preferences don't have to be simplified.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'Normal Ending' was better than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the former is more compelling than the latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?

to:

One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'Normal Ending' was better than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky Creator/EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the former is more compelling than the latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


Back to ThreeWorldsCollide.

to:

Back to ThreeWorldsCollide.ThreeWorldsCollide.
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


P.S. [[http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/3yh/link_three_worlds_collide_analysis/ A few commenters]] on LessWrong have requested that a note be added regarding wireheading: [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1lb/are_wireheads_happy/ it has been discovered recently that wanting and liking run on different circuits.]] Being wireheaded to ''want'' may well cause behavior like that of the rats without any pleasure at all.

to:

P.S. [[http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/3yh/link_three_worlds_collide_analysis/ A few commenters]] on LessWrong Blog/LessWrong have requested that a note be added regarding wireheading: [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1lb/are_wireheads_happy/ it has been discovered recently that wanting and liking run on different circuits.]] Being wireheaded to ''want'' may well cause behavior like that of the rats without any pleasure at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And 'communicate' with, being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".

to:

But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And 'communicate' '[[BoldlyComing communicate]]' with, being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
I almost have a citation, now.

Added DiffLines:


''Edit:'' [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/fkx/a_definition_of_wireheading/ This Less Wrong article]] makes reference to a set of rodent experiments performed in the 1950s that fit my description above. The caveat about the effect of other parameters remains in force.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Eliminated \"If You Know What I Mean\" sinkhole as part of Special Efforts cleanup.


But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And [[IfYouKnowWhatIMean 'communicate' with]], being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".

to:

But in designing this scenario, in creating a ''plot'' to convey his message, the message has been undermined. Becuase the Super Happies ''do'' have friends, create new things, and make new discoveries about the outside world. They arrived at that star system because they detected a flux in the [[FTLTravel starline]] -- the same reason that brought the Babyeaters and the humans. They were happy to meet new species, optimistic about discovering new people to communicate with. (And [[IfYouKnowWhatIMean 'communicate' with]], with, being as [[StarfishAliens that's the same thing for Super Happies]], but that's unimportant.) And their technology was ''more advanced'' than either humanity's or the Babyeaters. The very reasons why wireheading is an ugly prospect are ''empirically'' baseless in the universe of "ThreeWorldsCollide".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


P.P.S. I don't actually have a citation for the wireheading rats. I cannot attest to whether any such experiments was actually performed, nor as to the results of said experiments, nor as to the effect of other parameters (e.g. the presence of alternative forms of entertainment) in the test environment.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Formatting tweak.


-->A sigh came from that hood. "Well... would you prefer a life entirely free of pain and sorrow, having sex all day long?"\\

to:

-->A ->A sigh came from that hood. "Well... would you prefer a life entirely free of pain and sorrow, having sex all day long?"\\
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


P.S. A few commenters have requested that a note be added regarding wireheading: [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1lb/are_wireheads_happy/ it has been discovered recently that wanting and liking run on different circuits.]] Being wireheaded to ''want'' may well cause behavior like that of the rats without any pleasure at all.

to:

P.S. [[http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/3yh/link_three_worlds_collide_analysis/ A few commenters commenters]] on LessWrong have requested that a note be added regarding wireheading: [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1lb/are_wireheads_happy/ it has been discovered recently that wanting and liking run on different circuits.]] Being wireheaded to ''want'' may well cause behavior like that of the rats without any pleasure at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


P.S. A few commenters have requested that a note be added regarding wireheading: [[http://lesswrong.com/lw/1lb/are_wireheads_happy/ it has been discovered recently that wanting and liking run on different circuits.]] Being wireheaded to ''want'' may well cause behavior like that of the rats without any pleasure at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fixing names for endings.


One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'false' ending was the better one!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the false ending is more compelling than the true one. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?

to:

One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'false' ending 'Normal Ending' was the better one!" than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the false ending former is more compelling than the true one.latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Minor tweaks.


One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'false' ending was the better one!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the false ending is more compelling than the true one. Why does the story fail for a large contingent of readers?

to:

One of the commonest reactions to "ThreeWorldsCollide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'false' ending was the better one!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple ValuesDissonance, is that EliezerYudkowsky is generally considered a ''good writer'', and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the false ending is more compelling than the true one. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers?



Given the choice between being Socrates dissatisfied and a pig satisfied, one might be forgiven for desiring the cleverness of Socrates. But given the choice between Socrates dissatisfied and Archimedes satisfied, the former starts to appear difficult to defend.

to:

Given the choice between being Socrates dissatisfied and a pig satisfied, one might be forgiven for desiring the cleverness of Socrates. But given the choice between Socrates dissatisfied and Archimedes satisfied, the former starts to appear becomes difficult to defend.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


-- RobinZimm

to:

-- RobinZimm@/RobinZimm
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Signing and titling the analysis.

Added DiffLines:

!!Narrative Necessity vs. Authorial Intent


Added DiffLines:


-- RobinZimm

Top