The issue is when you start running into thinking weird things about what you’re trying to do, and how you’re trying to do it, and when those weird things don’t have particularly loyal signals.
The particular example I have in mind is the idea of rationality outreach. I explained that there’s some amount that I can do, but that if I help people who have similar goals to mine pursue their more efficiently, and influence other people to have goals more similar to mine, then more utility will be generated over the long run than if I tried to do something myself. And that its possible that Harvard people would be more likely to create utility in the long term.
Which just sounds icky to a lot of people. A lot of people. Reactions have ranged from “mumbo jumbo” to “I guess you’re right, but eurgh” to “that’s ballsy, and I don’t know whether to laugh at you or admire you”.
I ultimately compared it to lobbying (it’s ugly, and you can try to create political change without it, but its harder and it probably won’t work), and summarized it as “Helping the world by helping others help others”. This seems to have worked.
It also interferes with my ability to signal loyalty via politics, since I disagree with most people’s political statements, think discussion of it is nigh useless with regards to changing anything, and can see people going for applause lights in conversation. Almost nobody seems to talk about the effectiveness of proposed policies as anything other than a right/wrong issue, and that spectrum seems to be pretty much uncorrelated with success. Trying to talk about the economics of something gets slight glares, since you’re arguing for the other team.
...so I just stay out of political conversations now.
My parents already knew that I’m an atheist.
The issue is when you start running into thinking weird things about what you’re trying to do, and how you’re trying to do it, and when those weird things don’t have particularly loyal signals.
The particular example I have in mind is the idea of rationality outreach. I explained that there’s some amount that I can do, but that if I help people who have similar goals to mine pursue their more efficiently, and influence other people to have goals more similar to mine, then more utility will be generated over the long run than if I tried to do something myself. And that its possible that Harvard people would be more likely to create utility in the long term.
Which just sounds icky to a lot of people. A lot of people. Reactions have ranged from “mumbo jumbo” to “I guess you’re right, but eurgh” to “that’s ballsy, and I don’t know whether to laugh at you or admire you”.
I ultimately compared it to lobbying (it’s ugly, and you can try to create political change without it, but its harder and it probably won’t work), and summarized it as “Helping the world by helping others help others”. This seems to have worked.
It also interferes with my ability to signal loyalty via politics, since I disagree with most people’s political statements, think discussion of it is nigh useless with regards to changing anything, and can see people going for applause lights in conversation. Almost nobody seems to talk about the effectiveness of proposed policies as anything other than a right/wrong issue, and that spectrum seems to be pretty much uncorrelated with success. Trying to talk about the economics of something gets slight glares, since you’re arguing for the other team.
...so I just stay out of political conversations now.
Our of curiosity, if you had to label yourself politically, what would it be?