The Straw Vulcan, Julia Galef Skepticon 4

[lcky7strng]

One of your tags says "atehist" you might want to change it to the proper spelling. But great lecture, thanks.

[BennyOcean]

Rationality is the method of achieving your goals? I think not.

[Chiparoo]

@BennyOcean How so? You use rationality to make decisions, the only reason to make a decision is to reach a goal. In what context is rationality not applied to achieving a goal?

[ozvulcan]

I found her arguments bankrupt.

[GaladedridDamodred]

This woman is amazing.

[Sairin13]

Fascinating.

[JohnnyKidder]

Somebody gotta send this to Zachary Quinto

[Roflcopter4b]

I actually noticed a lot of the moments she's pointing out from Star Trek as I was watching them as being pretty illogical. Good to see I was right.

[Nebzz]

I wished she checked that sound a little more.

[psikeyhackr]

@TheAtheistSocialist ROFL Atheists are such a joke. Is there intelligent life in the Andromeda galaxy? Yes or No? The only logical answer is, "We don't know?" None of the religious people can prove that their concept of God is correct. Maybe their is a God completely different from their paradigm. But then the atheists can't prove there isn't any kind of God, like one they have never conceived of. Agnosticism is the only logical position. LOL

[AboutTommie]

@psikeyhackr A negative does not have to be proven. Something that can be asserted without evidence (i.e. God) can be dismissed without evidence. Saying "You don't believe in God? Well can you PROVE he doesn't exist? AHA! Agnostic is the only way," but no, no it's not.

[psikeyhackr]

@AboutTommie Only if you refuse to admit that you don't know and possibly don't care.

[AboutTommie]

@psikeyhackr Most atheists gladly admit that they don't know but are driven to caring by the fact that everyone places so much importance in it, and that importance supersedes critical thinking from time to time. That's all it is. 

[MercuryShining]

@psikeyhackr That's like saying that because we can't prove the nonexistence of Santa, we must all be Santa-agnostic. Anyone familiar with science should know that science doesn't deal in absolute knowledge in the first place. We can say we know there is no god without any intention of claiming absolute knowledge and while remaining open to contrary evidence.

[psikeyhackr]

@MercuryShining Who has claimed that Santa Claus is immaterial? You can't say immaterial things do not exist since there are electric and magnetic fields. So how fast would a material Santa have to move to do what he supposedly does in one night?

Claiming that there is no intelligent life in the Andromeda galaxy just because no one can prove that there is, is more like the problem atheists have.

[MercuryShining]

@psikeyhackr Immaterial does not mean undetectable or unmeasurable. Alien life in Andromeda may be unprovable at this point, but is in theory testable as that life would be material and/or measurable. This is a false equivalence, though, as any natural occurrence such as life in the universe is automatically more likely than any supernatural (that is, defying the laws of nature) claim.

[AngelNiangao]

@psikeyhackr It's the difference between saying we know something and we believe something. Yes, we do not 'know' whether there is life in the Andromeda Galexy and we do not 'know' whether there is a god. But that does not change the fact that considering the evidence there is a probability of something being true. And it is not foolish to believe, for instance, that you will not win the lotery even though you cannot know for certain.

[supersims796]

@TheAtheistSocialist Heh, sweet irony! She's talking about rationality, and you exibit none of it!

[ObakeOnna]

Fascinating! It's rationality, but not rationality as we know it.

[rcreative1]

Great job. Look forward to seeing more presentations in the future.

[SubtleForces]

The example of chess is pretty wrong. I'd favor Hydra's mathematical & limited rational decision making over any super grand-master trying to play against it (simultaneously or not). Chess intuition works not because it occasionally makes sense, but because in most instances chess opposes two failure-prone humans.

That does not mean a winning intuitive decision is NOT irrational (a blunder) when analyzed in depth with a strong engine. Check J. Rowson's concept or hypertheory in chess for more.

[studentofsmith]

Let your heart choose the goal and your mind chart the course.

[Troubleshooter125]

Even Spock recognized the insufficiency of logic as he continued in his Starfleet career:

"Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."

-- Spock, to Valeris, Star Trek VI

As the Scarecrow gained brains at the end of The Wizard of Oz, and he may have been the original "straw man," so Spock realized the inadequacy of a purely logic-based viewpoint. Took a while, but it still happened!

[dattebenforcer]

@Troubleshooter125 fyi, spock wasn't really rational.

[xxAgrippa01]

Would be nice if these videos had brief descriptions of the talk rather than just a name. One can't be expected to bookmark all of them and watch through them to find the topics that mean the most you. There are so many. I know this is a silly complaint, but it's valid.

[tmtyler]

You can have rational goal-seeking agents without emotions - as Spock illustrates fairly well. Emotions play several roles - they are hacks, they interface to the endocrine sytem and they help humans signal commitment to each other - for example anger helps to signal that you are sincere in your threats. Goal-seeking agents can skip emotions.

[Lolagoestohollywood]

@tmtyler No, you can't. The point is, even if say your goal is purely that you yourself survive, why do you want to survive right now? Everybody will die eventually, so what does it matter? The reason why it matters is because you *feel* that it is better. Seriously, name any non-emotional reason why you shouldn't die right now. Because people would miss you or would otherwise suffer when you are gone? - But that only makes sense if you *feel* bad at the thought of them suffering.

[TenArashi]

Loved this so much. As a huge Star Trek fan, and as a proud rationalist, I can't count the number of times I've just felt so frustrated by the show or its fans and just wanted to somehow teach them every single way Star Trek gets rationality totally wrong. Now I can link here at the least! :D

[Forkroute]

Jewish, hot, smart and single.

[Jaybird196]

"For the first time I was happy" . Aw, does anyone else kinda wanna give Spock a hug? :)

[HebaruSan]

The definitions at 6:20 are pretty specious--they seem very post hoc. You go out into the world and try to establish a worldview. If it turns out to be accurate, then in retrospect your method was rational, regardless of how you arrived at it; otherwise it wasn't. You try to achieve your goals; if you succeed, then the method you used is rational (whatever it was!); otherwise it wasn't.

What matters is HOW do you get an accurate view? how do you achieve goals? This isn't addressed.

[yerk3]

tvtropes fo da win

[TheViciousSquare]

Fantastic presentation. I always loved Spock because there weren't any other tv characters like him at the time. But that's got me thinking... do we have any *better* television role models for rationality and logic today? As someone who hasn't had a tv for most of my adult life, I'm out of touch. What modern tv character trumps Spock today in terms of logic and rationality? Anyone?

[DarkEmergence]

I never saw the point in things like Skepticons because I figured it was preaching to the choir; but watching a few of the videos, I think it might be worth while.

[kiplingslastcat]

I enjoyed this. She's really good. Pretty too! But it does address some big misconceptions about rationality.

[Ignorantf00l]

She looks like Anne Hathaway a bit

[likeAgopher]

I think what Spock was trying to say at the end was, "Hey, thanks a lot captain-- you know, for 'curing' me of my only moment of happiness, ever. You jerk." (Great presentation, btw.)

[Wrath0fKhan]

Funny... The Straw Vulcan strawmanned the Vulcan...

[DasHinchen]

8:00 yo dawgh I heard you like youtube videos so we put a youtube video in your youtube video so you can watch a youtube video while you watch a youtube video

[Jp989989]

A nice chat pretty light. Misquote of Robert caldeni's research into influence is 20years old and misquoted and represented.

[jlltruthseeker]

This was once of the best lectures ive ever seen! My brain has many new wringles...lol. Ive never looked at ration, logic, and reason in this manner. Thanks 4 posting this!

[EpistemicFusion]

Ohh I love me some Julia Galef.

[cynthiaall]

I know this, I watched Star Trek too!

[chibiariel]

I'm so glad someone shares my viewpoint. TTuTT Whenever I hear people talk about logic and rationality, it annoys me, because they always go on in the way she mentions here. So, it's nice that I'm not alone in thinking this. XD -- Although, that's to be expected, I've never seen anyone actually mention this publicly or point it out to others when necessary in a debate. It's ALWAYS annoying to me when others say someone is being too rational. You just can't be TOO rational!

[luchogallardoleon]

You can evaluate the best partner posible like that. Just dont tell her.

[MyOnlyFarph]

Incredibly insightful and intelligent lecture. I'll never watch Star Trek the same way again.

[suitzoot]

hambone - click on "edit video" and stabilize and I'm feeling lucky then save - it will improve this video :)

[photomongoose]

Great talk. I've always found the portrayal of science and rationality in pop culture fraught with inaccuracies. Its nice to see someone elucidate this. I wish there had been time for questions.

[aerhearts]

I'm in love! Why can't more women be like this?

[johnnymanhands]

most curious ~raises eyebrow~

[LucisFerre1]

I don't think that emotions and values are necessarily interdependent. Bugs seem to value living even though we have no idea if they have emotions.

[AndreaTheNerd]

@LucisFerre1 "Bugs seem to value living." Citation needed. I tried looking it up, and the closest I found was an entomologist explaining how insects can't feel pain.

[LucisFerre1]

@AndreaTheNerd, That's why I said "seems". They scurry away from perceived danger.

[chibiariel]

@LucisFerre1 - Bugs can feel physical pain. As for emotions, emotions come from being social animals. So, one can conclude social bugs may also feel some sort of emotions. For example, Yellow Jackets are extremely violent (as we would call it) and will hold what seems to be a grudge against people (they'll attack the same person whenever they see them), and YJs are social wasps. Potter wasps are not social and are very unlikely to attack, even if their own home is being destroyed. It's biology.

[chibiariel]

@LucisFerre1 - It's also biology to 'value' living. The whole point of life is to keep living. What we perceive as a 'value' isn't necessarily really a value, but an innate desire, a biologically ingrained need to keep living.

[LucisFerre1]

It's true, Kirk would occasionally beat Spock at chess using intuition over logic, which is absurd in the case of chess. Secondly, the classic "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few", which is classic collectivism, even Marxist... is internally flawed as so called "collectivist rights" cannot outweigh the rights of the individuals that make up the group, as that is all that the collective is.

[EcstasyOfApostasy]

Wow. This lady REALLY loves Star Trek.

[sporkincarnate]

@EcstasyOfApostasy A logical viewpoint.

[LucisFerre1]

@EcstasyOfApostasy , actually, she said that she was unfamiliar with some aspect of the fictional Vulcans that she didn't remember from watching it in her childhood.