I think this discussion is very hard to have because people have substantial variation in how good their base intuitions, including social intuitions, are and also substantial variation in how good their rational minds (S2′s) are.
Most good forecasters start off with pretty good base intuitions for probabilities, and forecasting/calibration practice helps refine their intuitions to be even better. Some good forecasters start with terrible probabilistic intuitions and the formal exercises help improve their intuitions. (I suppose it’s also theoretically possible for some good forecasters to start with terrible probabilistic intuitions, continue to have terrible probabilistic intuitions, but forecast well because their formal practice and analysis allows them to override their intuitions. I’ve just never heard about this in practice).
Many mental health conditions come from creating a wrong intuition/prior about the world that rational-adjacent therapy methods like CBT teach you to override. Depression being the most famous/common. When I’m depressed, it’s natural to fixate on specific high-noise signals and automatically assume bad interpretations of the evidence (eg someone didn’t respond to a text because I’ve upset them, or they don’t like me for other reasons). Presumably there’s the inverse problem as well (eg manics have a very positive “rose-colored goggles” prior for everything), but I’ve never heard of this as a serious problem in practice.
In the realm of social intuitions, I think there’s large variation in how good different social intuitions are. Autism in particular is a disorder which has a core manifestation of being bad at parsing social intuitions. I imagine most young autistic people would benefit from learning higher-order rationality and principles about social questions counteracting/overriding their own poor social intuitions (“vibes”), and to a lesser extent training/calibrating their poor social intuitions to become better. On the flip side, neurotypical people that are prone to ideological capture should potentially learn to trust their hearts more, and be less inclined to trust higher order ideologies and “rationality” (which often manifests as rationalizations), in favor of their base intuitions.
But even all of these comments are overly high-order glosses. Autism does not make you immune to rationalization, nor does ideological capture suddenly make you incapable of rationality. Reverse all advice you hear, etc.
I think this discussion is very hard to have because people have substantial variation in how good their base intuitions, including social intuitions, are and also substantial variation in how good their rational minds (S2′s) are.
Most good forecasters start off with pretty good base intuitions for probabilities, and forecasting/calibration practice helps refine their intuitions to be even better. Some good forecasters start with terrible probabilistic intuitions and the formal exercises help improve their intuitions. (I suppose it’s also theoretically possible for some good forecasters to start with terrible probabilistic intuitions, continue to have terrible probabilistic intuitions, but forecast well because their formal practice and analysis allows them to override their intuitions. I’ve just never heard about this in practice).
Many mental health conditions come from creating a wrong intuition/prior about the world that rational-adjacent therapy methods like CBT teach you to override. Depression being the most famous/common. When I’m depressed, it’s natural to fixate on specific high-noise signals and automatically assume bad interpretations of the evidence (eg someone didn’t respond to a text because I’ve upset them, or they don’t like me for other reasons). Presumably there’s the inverse problem as well (eg manics have a very positive “rose-colored goggles” prior for everything), but I’ve never heard of this as a serious problem in practice.
In the realm of social intuitions, I think there’s large variation in how good different social intuitions are. Autism in particular is a disorder which has a core manifestation of being bad at parsing social intuitions. I imagine most young autistic people would benefit from learning higher-order rationality and principles about social questions counteracting/overriding their own poor social intuitions (“vibes”), and to a lesser extent training/calibrating their poor social intuitions to become better. On the flip side, neurotypical people that are prone to ideological capture should potentially learn to trust their hearts more, and be less inclined to trust higher order ideologies and “rationality” (which often manifests as rationalizations), in favor of their base intuitions.
But even all of these comments are overly high-order glosses. Autism does not make you immune to rationalization, nor does ideological capture suddenly make you incapable of rationality. Reverse all advice you hear, etc.