Not enough people are working on the risk of microplastics in the brain (and body) on general health. This has been swept under the rug as many companies are incentivised to do so. The fact that we each have on average a plastic spoon’s worth of it, and its correlation with dementia is most concerning: https://hsc.unm.edu/news/2025/_media/41591_2024_article_3453.pdf
The number of people who are truly intellectually humble is hilariously small, even on LessWrong. True intellectual humility demands objective disengagement with all -isms, thought structures and romantic ideas. It demands rugged criticism, refusing to tie yourself to any one set of ideas, because they’re probably all wrong in different ways. It requires understanding that cause and effect often doesn’t exist, instead filled by statistics and random chance. It requires rejecting the strong (wo)man theory of history, politics and economics, and refusing to outsource your thinking to other people because they have ‘thought about it harder’. If you cannot outsource, you should lean towards saying ‘I do not know’, rather than pointing to the most common opinion. It requires strict citations for all statements made.
Even on LW I don’t think the standards are high enough.
If “true intellectual humility” requires rejecting economics and politics, ignoring expert consensus on scientific matters, shying away from causal models, and “strict citations” for every statement you make… then, obviously, “true intellectual humility” is actively counterproductive nonsense that anybody who wants to achieve anything meaningful in the real world[1] should reject immediately.
Not enough people are working on the risk of microplastics in the brain (and body) on general health. This has been swept under the rug as many companies are incentivised to do so. The fact that we each have on average a plastic spoon’s worth of it, and its correlation with dementia is most concerning: https://hsc.unm.edu/news/2025/_media/41591_2024_article_3453.pdf
The number of people who are truly intellectually humble is hilariously small, even on LessWrong. True intellectual humility demands objective disengagement with all -isms, thought structures and romantic ideas. It demands rugged criticism, refusing to tie yourself to any one set of ideas, because they’re probably all wrong in different ways. It requires understanding that cause and effect often doesn’t exist, instead filled by statistics and random chance. It requires rejecting the strong (wo)man theory of history, politics and economics, and refusing to outsource your thinking to other people because they have ‘thought about it harder’. If you cannot outsource, you should lean towards saying ‘I do not know’, rather than pointing to the most common opinion. It requires strict citations for all statements made.
Even on LW I don’t think the standards are high enough.
Sometimes the best move is just 1. e4
If “true intellectual humility” requires rejecting economics and politics, ignoring expert consensus on scientific matters, shying away from causal models, and “strict citations” for every statement you make… then, obviously, “true intellectual humility” is actively counterproductive nonsense that anybody who wants to achieve anything meaningful in the real world[1] should reject immediately.
As opposed to obtaining self-wankery points on an online forum obsessed with the appearance as opposed to the substance of rigor