For fun, try applying the above list to a “group” such as Yahoo!, Google, Apple, etc. You might come to the surprising conclusion that most hi-tech businesses are actually cults. (What went wrong?)
Actually, other than the preoccupation with making money obviously, I don’t see much in common.
Notably, legitimate for-profit companies pay their employees for their work, they don’t solicit donations or unpaid work for the cause. In fact, they don’t require their employees to believe in a greater cause, or that their CEO is some sort of super-human being, or that their group is better than everybody else, and all the stuff that cults are about.
Sure, just like any human organization, companies can develop a culture of groupthink, ingroup-outgroup bias and excessive reverence towards authority. Functional companies recognize this as a problem and take steps to mitigate it. Cults, on the other hand, encourage it.
You might come to the surprising conclusion that most hi-tech businesses are actually cults. (What went wrong?)
And that’s a reductio? Or maybe not-actual-cult organisations exploit foibles that everyone has, in a comprehensive way, and other social organsiations do so in a lesser way. Maybe its a spectrum. Glass half-full, glass half-enpty.
For my money, a successful rationalist organisation should be right up at the zero end of the scale. I don’t think
anyone has ever done this. I think it’s an interesting idea to design it. I’m pretty sure EY has zero interest. He thinks he is succeeding when people become deconverted from formal religion, and doesn’t check they they have become reconverted to lesswrongianity. I don’t think that is evil on his part. I think most cult leaders slip into it. If someone wants to design a rationalist organistation that is free from all the group-level, sociological forces towards irrationality,
they are going to have to study some (yech!) social psyhchoogy...I know, soft sciences!
a successful rationalist organisation should be right up at the zero end of the scale
Because everyone knows that reversed stupidity is the best form of rationality ever.
Here are some guidelines for the new ultra-rational community to follow:
Don’t have any leadership. If someone tries to organize something, make sure you criticize them loudly and question their motives, until they crawl away crying.
Prevent new people from joining you.
Money making or any success in real life should be considered shameful.
Emphasise that there is no truth, no reality, ever. You are an intolerant bigot if you think that 2+2=4.
You shall never: sing, dance, read poetry, give someone cookie, smile, etc.
You should invest a lot of energy into offending your group members, and especially anyone who tries to do something admirable.
You should never feel guilty for being an asshole to other members of your group.
Preferably, you should not even speak with other group members. Or meet them.
If you break any of these rules, I can give you a hyperlink to a cultish behavior.
Nice response so I’m keeping it, but killthread beyond this point, or take it to the LW uncensored thread on Reddit. Attention equals reward for trolls.
Discussion of this action is also meta and should also go to the uncensored thread (posting a link there will be tolerated so long as the body text is not offensive).
He thinks he is succeeding when people become deconverted from formal religion, and doesn’t check they they have become reconverted to lesswrongianity.
Really? I get much more of the “have a deliberately built, internally consistent, and concordant with reality worldview” vibe from EY and LW than I do from most of the new atheist movement.
If someone wants to design a rationalist organistation that is free from all the group-level, sociological forces towards irrationality, they are going to have to study some (yech!) social psyhchoogy...I know, soft sciences!
Really? I get much more of the “have a deliberately built, internally consistent, and concordant with reality worldview” vibe from EY and LW than I do from most of the new atheist movement.
I don’t see what you are getting at. Are you saying the psychological basis of a belief (groupthink vesus rational appraisal) doens’t matter, so long as the belief is correct.
If you tell me that all successful organization do X, and then advise me not to do X, I’ll start to doubt that you have my best interests at heart. At least if I can think of several defunct clubs/ideas from my own experience that did not do X (which I think I can).
Insofar as many corporations would check more items from that list than I suspect the Boston LW group would, yes.
Insofar as many of the items are vague enough to apply to any social group that elicits loyalty from its members, yes.
One problem is relative terms like “excessive” in “excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment”. What observations, precisely, count as indications of “excessive” behavior in this regard?
Or “preoccupied with making money”—well who isn’t? Again, what’s a cult-indicative level of preoccupation? It’s going to be hard to beat, e.g. the startup community in terms of being obsessed with money, so this indicator totally fails to discriminate cults in any useful manner. If you said “cults assert and enforce an exclusive and all-encompassing claim to members’ or prospective members’ income and wealth”, that would be more diagnostic. (But then you couldn’t arbitrarily designate any group you didn’t like as being a cult. Oh well.)
For fun, try applying the above list to a “group” such as Yahoo!, Google, Apple, etc. You might come to the surprising conclusion that most hi-tech businesses are actually cults. (What went wrong?)
One of my favorite versions of this: is the National Institute of Health a cult? The answer may surprise you!
Actually, other than the preoccupation with making money obviously, I don’t see much in common.
Notably, legitimate for-profit companies pay their employees for their work, they don’t solicit donations or unpaid work for the cause. In fact, they don’t require their employees to believe in a greater cause, or that their CEO is some sort of super-human being, or that their group is better than everybody else, and all the stuff that cults are about.
Sure, just like any human organization, companies can develop a culture of groupthink, ingroup-outgroup bias and excessive reverence towards authority. Functional companies recognize this as a problem and take steps to mitigate it. Cults, on the other hand, encourage it.
And that’s a reductio? Or maybe not-actual-cult organisations exploit foibles that everyone has, in a comprehensive way, and other social organsiations do so in a lesser way. Maybe its a spectrum. Glass half-full, glass half-enpty.
For my money, a successful rationalist organisation should be right up at the zero end of the scale. I don’t think anyone has ever done this. I think it’s an interesting idea to design it. I’m pretty sure EY has zero interest. He thinks he is succeeding when people become deconverted from formal religion, and doesn’t check they they have become reconverted to lesswrongianity. I don’t think that is evil on his part. I think most cult leaders slip into it. If someone wants to design a rationalist organistation that is free from all the group-level, sociological forces towards irrationality, they are going to have to study some (yech!) social psyhchoogy...I know, soft sciences!
Edited for claity
Because everyone knows that reversed stupidity is the best form of rationality ever.
Here are some guidelines for the new ultra-rational community to follow:
Don’t have any leadership. If someone tries to organize something, make sure you criticize them loudly and question their motives, until they crawl away crying.
Prevent new people from joining you.
Money making or any success in real life should be considered shameful.
Emphasise that there is no truth, no reality, ever. You are an intolerant bigot if you think that 2+2=4.
You shall never: sing, dance, read poetry, give someone cookie, smile, etc.
You should invest a lot of energy into offending your group members, and especially anyone who tries to do something admirable.
You should never feel guilty for being an asshole to other members of your group.
Preferably, you should not even speak with other group members. Or meet them.
If you break any of these rules, I can give you a hyperlink to a cultish behavior.
Nice response so I’m keeping it, but killthread beyond this point, or take it to the LW uncensored thread on Reddit. Attention equals reward for trolls.
Discussion of this action is also meta and should also go to the uncensored thread (posting a link there will be tolerated so long as the body text is not offensive).
Really? I get much more of the “have a deliberately built, internally consistent, and concordant with reality worldview” vibe from EY and LW than I do from most of the new atheist movement.
Have you read the Death Spirals and the Cult Attractor sequence?
I don’t see what you are getting at. Are you saying the psychological basis of a belief (groupthink vesus rational appraisal) doens’t matter, so long as the belief is correct.
If you tell me that all successful organization do X, and then advise me not to do X, I’ll start to doubt that you have my best interests at heart. At least if I can think of several defunct clubs/ideas from my own experience that did not do X (which I think I can).
Successful at what? There isn’t an organisation on the planet that’s successful at Overcoming Bias.
Edit: Oh, and the original comment (examining whether LW meets the criteria for culthood) has been deleted. Hmm....
Insofar as many corporations would check more items from that list than I suspect the Boston LW group would, yes.
Insofar as many of the items are vague enough to apply to any social group that elicits loyalty from its members, yes.
One problem is relative terms like “excessive” in “excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment”. What observations, precisely, count as indications of “excessive” behavior in this regard?
Or “preoccupied with making money”—well who isn’t? Again, what’s a cult-indicative level of preoccupation? It’s going to be hard to beat, e.g. the startup community in terms of being obsessed with money, so this indicator totally fails to discriminate cults in any useful manner. If you said “cults assert and enforce an exclusive and all-encompassing claim to members’ or prospective members’ income and wealth”, that would be more diagnostic. (But then you couldn’t arbitrarily designate any group you didn’t like as being a cult. Oh well.)