I have an apparently novel n=1 experiment. I would like to start by making it n=2. Hello, how are you?
I tried to make myself smarter and it worked.
The basic result is that I used to make accurate predictions at roughly the 30% rate, and now it’s over 99%. It was too low, and now it’s high enough. It also does things like make video games easier. Unfortunately I’m too neurodivergent to get even remotely accurate IQ results, so I can’t test that properly. For the record I test at 129. More on this later.
I want to see if I can make you smarter too.
I do recommend you read the health warnings, which are in the next section. Nevertheless I like [without further ado] so here we go.
Set 0: definitions.
Set 1: verbal predictions
Set 2: intuitive, nonverbal, subjective predictions.
Set 3: mind stretches.
Set 4: contradiction thrifting.
To do sets of set 1 with proper form requires precise definitions. Thus the first step is to practice defining things explicitly. Get into the habit of ensuring you know the exact meaning of every word in your prediction. Look for equivocations, and stop.
The second step is to intentionally make predictions, and record them in some fashion. My memory is good enough that I simply remembered them, but if you are apt to forget or confabulate, write them down. Next, test the prediction. If you got it wrong, re-write the prediction such that you would have predicted correctly. Compare the two predictions to find the error. Fix your understanding of the underlying principles, and predict again. Repeat as necessary.
The third step is doing the same thing, but using emotions as inputs instead of words and ideas. When you’re in a situation, notice how the situation makes you feel, in as much detail as possible. Write it down if you can find the words. Look at how the situation turns out. Then, conclude: [feeling X] predicts [outcome Y]. Look for similar-feeling situations, and see if you can predict how they turn out. If you’re wrong, update your feeling-outcome pair, and repeat as necessary.
Correctly making a prediction involves mentally holding a whole situation in your mind at once.
Either through chunking or through a mechanism I don’t have a word for but which works exactly like chunking, you can train your personal RAM. Hold the most complex idea you can hold, then make it more complex. You will start dropping parts of the idea. Pick them up again. If you are doing it correctly, it subjectively feels like stretching. Repeat until desired mind size is achieved.
The fifth step is about relating your predictions to each other. If you have a nice set of useful predictive principles, and you have a nicely stretched mind, then you can pull two of them in mind at once, and compare them. Make sure, where their ranges overlap, they predict the same thing. If not, return to set 1. If so, then drop one idea and pick up the next one. Repeat until dead.
Put like this it doesn’t sound too complicated, does it? It’s more like a gym schedule than a reading schedule. The power comes from intentional training. Not understanding the exercise, but instead doing the exercise.
Put another way, it really should make you smarter. The most effective way to get smarter is to do this on purpose.
Anyway HEALTH WARNINGS.
Psychologists had issues replicating depressive realism, but I attribute this failure to psychological incompetence.
If you practice properly, you can expect it to cause depression. Not exclusively, but of particular significance, the brain is not designed to handle an accurate self-assessment. It reflexively downgrades the opinion of the voluntary consciousness when it does its own internal calculations. Your feelings about yourself will become irrationally and severely negative. Not quite, “I get hangnails sometimes, that means I deserve life in prison,” I’m exaggerating. It’s only directionally similar.
Repeating for emphasis: if you start to feel terrible it means it is working.
Further, reversal is dubious. If it’s worse than you think and you want to back out, it is unlikely you’ll be able to forget your fancy new self-knowledge.
There is a cure, and it’s hair of the dog. The way out is through. Of course everyone is different, but to ballpark it, if your path is ten years long, expect years 2 to 8 to be significantly uncomfortable. There’s a remarkably J-shaped results curve.
Repeating for emphasis: if you’re not sure you want to go the whole way, then don’t start.
On the plus side you might have already done this to yourself, in which case I would like to suggest a solution.
I personally n=1 found that lies and truth react exothermically. That means it catches fire in your brain and burns. Ow. If you inject some truth, getting it back out is not likely, it will instead sit there combusting any lies it comes into contact with. It stops hurting when you don’t have any lies left lying around.
It is perhaps possible to very carefully avoid learning about yourself. Perhaps, in fact, truth can be surgically extracted, leaving a pure field of lies. If you want to self-experiment on this, don’t let me stop you. On the contrary I would appreciate monthly reports. Let me remind you to keep in mind the risks and costs, versus the expected value.
It is also socially expensive.
If you make substantially better predictions and your friends do not, your options are to change them from friends to subordinates, or to stop being friends.
You can lie to them if you want. Say you agree when you don’t. Then they are subordinates you are manipulating into thinking they have a peer relationship. This both costly and risky.
High IQ is isolating. If you train your IQ higher, you will become more isolated.
Critical Thinking as a Gym Schedule
I have an apparently novel n=1 experiment. I would like to start by making it n=2. Hello, how are you?
I tried to make myself smarter and it worked.
The basic result is that I used to make accurate predictions at roughly the 30% rate, and now it’s over 99%. It was too low, and now it’s high enough. It also does things like make video games easier. Unfortunately I’m too neurodivergent to get even remotely accurate IQ results, so I can’t test that properly. For the record I test at 129. More on this later.
I want to see if I can make you smarter too.
I do recommend you read the health warnings, which are in the next section. Nevertheless I like [without further ado] so here we go.
Set 0: definitions.
Set 1: verbal predictions
Set 2: intuitive, nonverbal, subjective predictions.
Set 3: mind stretches.
Set 4: contradiction thrifting.
To do sets of set 1 with proper form requires precise definitions. Thus the first step is to practice defining things explicitly. Get into the habit of ensuring you know the exact meaning of every word in your prediction. Look for equivocations, and stop.
The second step is to intentionally make predictions, and record them in some fashion. My memory is good enough that I simply remembered them, but if you are apt to forget or confabulate, write them down. Next, test the prediction. If you got it wrong, re-write the prediction such that you would have predicted correctly. Compare the two predictions to find the error. Fix your understanding of the underlying principles, and predict again. Repeat as necessary.
The third step is doing the same thing, but using emotions as inputs instead of words and ideas. When you’re in a situation, notice how the situation makes you feel, in as much detail as possible. Write it down if you can find the words. Look at how the situation turns out. Then, conclude: [feeling X] predicts [outcome Y]. Look for similar-feeling situations, and see if you can predict how they turn out. If you’re wrong, update your feeling-outcome pair, and repeat as necessary.
Correctly making a prediction involves mentally holding a whole situation in your mind at once.
Either through chunking or through a mechanism I don’t have a word for but which works exactly like chunking, you can train your personal RAM. Hold the most complex idea you can hold, then make it more complex. You will start dropping parts of the idea. Pick them up again. If you are doing it correctly, it subjectively feels like stretching. Repeat until desired mind size is achieved.
The fifth step is about relating your predictions to each other. If you have a nice set of useful predictive principles, and you have a nicely stretched mind, then you can pull two of them in mind at once, and compare them. Make sure, where their ranges overlap, they predict the same thing. If not, return to set 1. If so, then drop one idea and pick up the next one. Repeat until dead.
Put like this it doesn’t sound too complicated, does it? It’s more like a gym schedule than a reading schedule. The power comes from intentional training. Not understanding the exercise, but instead doing the exercise.
Put another way, it really should make you smarter. The most effective way to get smarter is to do this on purpose.
Anyway HEALTH WARNINGS.
Psychologists had issues replicating depressive realism, but I attribute this failure to psychological incompetence.
If you practice properly, you can expect it to cause depression. Not exclusively, but of particular significance, the brain is not designed to handle an accurate self-assessment. It reflexively downgrades the opinion of the voluntary consciousness when it does its own internal calculations. Your feelings about yourself will become irrationally and severely negative. Not quite, “I get hangnails sometimes, that means I deserve life in prison,” I’m exaggerating. It’s only directionally similar.
Repeating for emphasis: if you start to feel terrible it means it is working.
Further, reversal is dubious. If it’s worse than you think and you want to back out, it is unlikely you’ll be able to forget your fancy new self-knowledge.
There is a cure, and it’s hair of the dog. The way out is through. Of course everyone is different, but to ballpark it, if your path is ten years long, expect years 2 to 8 to be significantly uncomfortable. There’s a remarkably J-shaped results curve.
Repeating for emphasis: if you’re not sure you want to go the whole way, then don’t start.
On the plus side you might have already done this to yourself, in which case I would like to suggest a solution.
I personally n=1 found that lies and truth react exothermically. That means it catches fire in your brain and burns. Ow. If you inject some truth, getting it back out is not likely, it will instead sit there combusting any lies it comes into contact with. It stops hurting when you don’t have any lies left lying around.
It is perhaps possible to very carefully avoid learning about yourself. Perhaps, in fact, truth can be surgically extracted, leaving a pure field of lies. If you want to self-experiment on this, don’t let me stop you. On the contrary I would appreciate monthly reports. Let me remind you to keep in mind the risks and costs, versus the expected value.
It is also socially expensive.
If you make substantially better predictions and your friends do not, your options are to change them from friends to subordinates, or to stop being friends.
You can lie to them if you want. Say you agree when you don’t. Then they are subordinates you are manipulating into thinking they have a peer relationship. This both costly and risky.
High IQ is isolating. If you train your IQ higher, you will become more isolated.