While I think you are picking up on some correct social dynamics, I would encourage you to be hesitant about trying to recruit people or acting unilaterally on your current understanding and do community outreach. There are many levels to this game, and a lot of the most competent people have developed strong allergic reactions to people who are trying to consciously apply social techniques to influence their opinion. A lot of the reason why we do have a lot of good people in the community is precisely because we tend to stick more to the object level and tend to have conversations that are more based on logical than associative relations.
Ben Hoffman has a lot of writing on this (he calls it scribe culture) as has Paul Graham and a few other writers in the community. You would destroy a lot of trust that people have in this community by unilaterally starting to use the kind of social patterns you described in your post. Do whatever you want in your personal life, but be careful about burning the commons and the unilateralist curse when doing community outreach and representing the community.
In order to cause only true beliefs, you must understand both languages and then speak in the language of your interlocutor. As long as you talk nerdy to nerds and political to politicals, I’m not sure I see how trust might break down. That seems like a perfectly sustainable dynamic to me, but one of greater appeal and more general value.
While I think you are picking up on some correct social dynamics, I would encourage you to be hesitant about trying to recruit people or acting unilaterally on your current understanding and do community outreach. There are many levels to this game, and a lot of the most competent people have developed strong allergic reactions to people who are trying to consciously apply social techniques to influence their opinion. A lot of the reason why we do have a lot of good people in the community is precisely because we tend to stick more to the object level and tend to have conversations that are more based on logical than associative relations.
Ben Hoffman has a lot of writing on this (he calls it scribe culture) as has Paul Graham and a few other writers in the community. You would destroy a lot of trust that people have in this community by unilaterally starting to use the kind of social patterns you described in your post. Do whatever you want in your personal life, but be careful about burning the commons and the unilateralist curse when doing community outreach and representing the community.
In order to cause only true beliefs, you must understand both languages and then speak in the language of your interlocutor. As long as you talk nerdy to nerds and political to politicals, I’m not sure I see how trust might break down. That seems like a perfectly sustainable dynamic to me, but one of greater appeal and more general value.