Particularly because the kinds of questions LW is interested in (rationality, AI, general sociological speculation) are not ones where established experts can directly point to existing literature that answers those questions clearly and unequivocally
I was taking that for granted that you are unlikely to get definitive answers, and the exercise was more about avoiding known errors—“reinventing the wheel and making it square”.
Doing steps 3 and 5 reliably seems to basically require a commitment similar to that of a full-time job.[2]
What is the point of steps 3 and 5?
And it requires a tremendous amount of already-existing expertise, and a fair bit of research taste, and a commitment to norms and principles of epistemic rationality, etc.
Even if you are soliciting expert advice, not delving into primary sources?
Not even in comments
It’s possibly for experts to turn up and offer unsolicited critique as well...but the recipient needs to listen to benefit.
If it’s philosophy, you can go to philosophyforums.com or philosophy.stackexchange.com or r/askphilosophy.
If it’s physics, you can go to physicsforums.com...etc.
I was taking that for granted that you are unlikely to get definitive answers, and the exercise was more about avoiding known errors—“reinventing the wheel and making it square”.
What is the point of steps 3 and 5?
Even if you are soliciting expert advice, not delving into primary sources?
It’s possibly for experts to turn up and offer unsolicited critique as well...but the recipient needs to listen to benefit.