Noticing Confusion

An ac­count of ir­ra­tional­ity would be in­com­plete if it pro­vided no the­ory about how ra­tio­nal­ity works—or if its “the­ory” only con­sisted of vague tru­isms, with no pre­cise ex­plana­tory mechanism. This se­quence asks why it’s use­ful to base one’s be­hav­ior on “ra­tio­nal” ex­pec­ta­tions, and what it feels like to do so.

Fo­cus Your Uncertainty

What is Ev­i­dence?

Scien­tific Ev­i­dence, Le­gal Ev­i­dence, Ra­tional Evidence

How Much Ev­i­dence Does It Take?

Ein­stein’s Arrogance

Oc­cam’s Razor

Your Strength as a Rationalist

Ab­sence of Ev­i­dence Is Ev­i­dence of Absence

Con­ser­va­tion of Ex­pected Evidence

Hind­sight De­val­ues Science

Illu­sion of Trans­parency: Why No One Un­der­stands You

Ex­pect­ing Short In­fer­en­tial Distances