In saying this, I am in no way saying that the average teenager is stupid, or lacks the cognitive abilities to full read and appreciate Less Wrong.
However, the readability of the Core Sequences isn’t at a low reading level. To make them more teen-friendly, we may wish to consider how to make them more accessible. This may mean making them shorter, summarizing the main ideas more frequently, and using applicable real-life examples more.
I’d be interested in knowing what kind of help we’re looking for to make this happen. I’d be willing to help with the writing of the new articles if I knew which were most wanted, and had a few people (and some teens) to bounce them off of when completed.
In general, we need rationality materials for people of ordinary intelligence. The vast majority of people are part of the rationality waterline we’re trying to raise. And it wouldn’t surprise me if writing materials for them would lead to clearer, simpler explanations which are just as sound as the ones we have.
I have a proof of concept of sorts about improved explanations—the jump from roman numerals to Arabic. I’ve also heard that the first notation for calculus was much harder to work with than the current notation.
My impression is that adults who can understand the sequences could have understood them as teenagers, though I don’t know how you could prove that.
In saying this, I am in no way saying that the average teenager is stupid, or lacks the cognitive abilities to full read and appreciate Less Wrong.
However, the readability of the Core Sequences isn’t at a low reading level. To make them more teen-friendly, we may wish to consider how to make them more accessible. This may mean making them shorter, summarizing the main ideas more frequently, and using applicable real-life examples more.
I’d be interested in knowing what kind of help we’re looking for to make this happen. I’d be willing to help with the writing of the new articles if I knew which were most wanted, and had a few people (and some teens) to bounce them off of when completed.
In general, we need rationality materials for people of ordinary intelligence. The vast majority of people are part of the rationality waterline we’re trying to raise. And it wouldn’t surprise me if writing materials for them would lead to clearer, simpler explanations which are just as sound as the ones we have.
Essentially what I was trying to say, only put more succinctly and better than I did. Thanks. ^_^
You’re welcome.
I have a proof of concept of sorts about improved explanations—the jump from roman numerals to Arabic. I’ve also heard that the first notation for calculus was much harder to work with than the current notation.
My impression is that adults who can understand the sequences could have understood them as teenagers, though I don’t know how you could prove that.