Eliezer considers fighting akrasia to be part of the art of rationality; he compares it to “kicking” to our “punching”. I’m not sure why he considers them to be the same Art rather than two related Arts.
Remember your post on haunted rationalists, and Eliezer’s reply about how it’s possible to successfully work to accept rational beliefs even with the not-so-conscious, not-so-verbal parts of oneself that might be continue to believe in ghosts after one rationally understands the arguments against?
It sounds like maybe you mean “rationality” (or “x-rationality”) to include only “conscious processes that one employs to route around natural biases, with one’s verbal centers, on purpose”, while Eliezer is using “rationality” to mean “extra bonus sanity” or “trying to get one’s whole mind, impression-making-systems, decision-making-systems, etc., in good contact with all the evidence and with one’s own real concerns” (e.g., in the manner RichardKennaway describes changing his decision-making). It’s this latter art that I’d like to improve in, at least.
Remember your post on haunted rationalists, and Eliezer’s reply about how it’s possible to successfully work to accept rational beliefs even with the not-so-conscious, not-so-verbal parts of oneself that might be continue to believe in ghosts after one rationally understands the arguments against?
It sounds like maybe you mean “rationality” (or “x-rationality”) to include only “conscious processes that one employs to route around natural biases, with one’s verbal centers, on purpose”, while Eliezer is using “rationality” to mean “extra bonus sanity” or “trying to get one’s whole mind, impression-making-systems, decision-making-systems, etc., in good contact with all the evidence and with one’s own real concerns” (e.g., in the manner RichardKennaway describes changing his decision-making). It’s this latter art that I’d like to improve in, at least.