Actually, I think you’re wrong in thinking that LW doctrine doesn’t dictate heightened scrutiny of the deployment of self-deception. At the same time, I think you’re wrong to think false beliefs can seldom be quarantined, compartmentalization being a widely employed defense mechanism. (Cf., any liberal theist.)
Everyone feels a tug toward the pure truth, away from pure instrumental rationalism. You’re mistake (and LW’s), I think, is to incorporate truth into instrumental rationality (without really having a cogent rationale, given the reality of compartmentalization). The real defect in instrumental rationalism is that no person of integrity can take it to heart. “Values” are of two kinds: biological givens and acquired tendencies that restrict the operation of those givens (instinct and restraint). The drive for instrumental rationality is a biological given; epistemic rationality is a restraint intellectuals apply to their instrumental rationality. It is ethical in character, whereas instrumental rationality is not; and it is a seductive confusion to moralize it.
For intellectuals, the businessman’s “winner” ethos—the evaluative subordination of epistemic rationality to instrumentality—is an invitation to functional psychopathy.
LW appears to be mixed on the “truthiness should be part of instrumental rationality” issue.
It seems we disagree on the compartmentalising issue. I believe self-deception can’t easily be compartmentalised in the way you describe because we can’t accurately predict, in most cases, where our self-deception might become a premise in some future piece of reasoning. By its nature, we can’t correct at the later date, because we are unaware that our belief is wrong. What’s your reasoning regarding compartmentalizing? I’m interested in case I am overlooking something.
You’re mistake (and LW’s), I think, is to incorporate truth into instrumental rationality
My experience so far is that a large (50%?) part of LW agrees with you not me.
It is ethical in character, whereas instrumental rationality is not; and it is a seductive confusion to moralize it.
This is an interesting argument. In a sense I was treating the ethics as separate in this case. I’d be interested to hear a more detailed version of what you say here.
is an invitation to functional psychopathy.
There’s a great quote floating around somewhere about studying the truth vs. creating the truth. I can’t remember it specifically enough to find it right now… but yes I agree intellectuals will undermine their abilities if they adopt pure instrumentality.
Actually, I think you’re wrong in thinking that LW doctrine doesn’t dictate heightened scrutiny of the deployment of self-deception. At the same time, I think you’re wrong to think false beliefs can seldom be quarantined, compartmentalization being a widely employed defense mechanism. (Cf., any liberal theist.)
Everyone feels a tug toward the pure truth, away from pure instrumental rationalism. You’re mistake (and LW’s), I think, is to incorporate truth into instrumental rationality (without really having a cogent rationale, given the reality of compartmentalization). The real defect in instrumental rationalism is that no person of integrity can take it to heart. “Values” are of two kinds: biological givens and acquired tendencies that restrict the operation of those givens (instinct and restraint). The drive for instrumental rationality is a biological given; epistemic rationality is a restraint intellectuals apply to their instrumental rationality. It is ethical in character, whereas instrumental rationality is not; and it is a seductive confusion to moralize it.
For intellectuals, the businessman’s “winner” ethos—the evaluative subordination of epistemic rationality to instrumentality—is an invitation to functional psychopathy.
LW appears to be mixed on the “truthiness should be part of instrumental rationality” issue.
It seems we disagree on the compartmentalising issue. I believe self-deception can’t easily be compartmentalised in the way you describe because we can’t accurately predict, in most cases, where our self-deception might become a premise in some future piece of reasoning. By its nature, we can’t correct at the later date, because we are unaware that our belief is wrong. What’s your reasoning regarding compartmentalizing? I’m interested in case I am overlooking something.
My experience so far is that a large (50%?) part of LW agrees with you not me.
This is an interesting argument. In a sense I was treating the ethics as separate in this case. I’d be interested to hear a more detailed version of what you say here.
There’s a great quote floating around somewhere about studying the truth vs. creating the truth. I can’t remember it specifically enough to find it right now… but yes I agree intellectuals will undermine their abilities if they adopt pure instrumentality.