They’re signalling to the normies, people who take the outward signs of a thing for the thing itself. Hence people wearing spectacles with flat glass to look more intelligent, buying degrees from degree mills to put fake letters after their name, name-dropping people who don’t know their name, putting on airs of importance, and so on.
The much-cited “Impro” is a manual for actors presenting the outward signs to an audience. It has nothing to with attaining to genuine respect for your qualities and accomplishments.
Behind all that is the idea of “status” as a D&D stat with no gears, you just compare it with a die roll for the GM to tell you, “Yes, your bluster overawed the guard, and he lets you pass.” And perhaps the GM makes a note that as soon as you’ve swept past, the guard gets on the speaking tube to summon reinforcements, because ultimately, the only causal force in fiction is the author’s decisions.
You can con people for a while with “signalling”, but we have a lot of words for people who have worn their pretence thin.
Thanks for the reply, but this feels like strawmanning and not particularly rational. I get the impression that you would rather feel superior to the “normies” than understand them.
What? No, I did not mean to imply that your comment was a status grab.
May I ask what you mean by that “sigh”? Intuitively I interpret it as a passive-aggressive jab meaning something like “you are too stupid to understand me”, but I might be wrong.
What? No, I did not mean to imply that your comment was a status grab.
That was how I read your “you would rather feel superior to the “normies” than understand them.
About the sigh, that was just an expression of exasperation, not at you specifically, but at the prevalence of people leaping to status explanations. The meta-problem I have with status explanations is that the move sucks all the oxygen out of the air. Someone says “status”, and suddenly no-one can say anything that won’t be interpreted as a status move, and it’s impossible to get back to the object level.
I agree with your asking the original question about why signalling, to which my first comment gave my answer.
That was how I read your “you would rather feel superior to the “normies” than understand them.
Ah, I understand how I gave that impression.
IMO there is a big difference between trying to feel superior to normies and trying to look superior to normies. The latter could be a status grab.
Your post above did not look like a status grab to me, because IMO it did not make you look good. I did not imagine that anyone on Less Wrong would think: “Wow, this guy looks down on ‘normies’ - he is so cool!”
They’re signalling to the normies, people who take the outward signs of a thing for the thing itself. Hence people wearing spectacles with flat glass to look more intelligent, buying degrees from degree mills to put fake letters after their name, name-dropping people who don’t know their name, putting on airs of importance, and so on.
The much-cited “Impro” is a manual for actors presenting the outward signs to an audience. It has nothing to with attaining to genuine respect for your qualities and accomplishments.
Behind all that is the idea of “status” as a D&D stat with no gears, you just compare it with a die roll for the GM to tell you, “Yes, your bluster overawed the guard, and he lets you pass.” And perhaps the GM makes a note that as soon as you’ve swept past, the guard gets on the speaking tube to summon reinforcements, because ultimately, the only causal force in fiction is the author’s decisions.
You can con people for a while with “signalling”, but we have a lot of words for people who have worn their pretence thin.
Thanks for the reply, but this feels like strawmanning and not particularly rational. I get the impression that you would rather feel superior to the “normies” than understand them.
You mean, my comment was a status grab? Wow, so was yours! And so is this one! Everything anyone says is a status grab! There is only status!
Sigh.
What? No, I did not mean to imply that your comment was a status grab.
May I ask what you mean by that “sigh”? Intuitively I interpret it as a passive-aggressive jab meaning something like “you are too stupid to understand me”, but I might be wrong.
That was how I read your “you would rather feel superior to the “normies” than understand them.
About the sigh, that was just an expression of exasperation, not at you specifically, but at the prevalence of people leaping to status explanations. The meta-problem I have with status explanations is that the move sucks all the oxygen out of the air. Someone says “status”, and suddenly no-one can say anything that won’t be interpreted as a status move, and it’s impossible to get back to the object level.
I agree with your asking the original question about why signalling, to which my first comment gave my answer.
Ah, I understand how I gave that impression.
IMO there is a big difference between trying to feel superior to normies and trying to look superior to normies. The latter could be a status grab.
Your post above did not look like a status grab to me, because IMO it did not make you look good. I did not imagine that anyone on Less Wrong would think: “Wow, this guy looks down on ‘normies’ - he is so cool!”