I would rather have examples that better conform to reality than examples that are better characterizations of the principles in question.
Explicitly nonfictional stories would be better, though of course certain concerns apply to posting such information and it might be harder to find good examples.
I’m not sure what the relevance is here.
Yes, no, yes, yes. This is a very well-written post, incidentally. Good work.
Karma doesn’t mean “rationality points,” and Aumann rationality has additional prerequisites anyway. My judgement stands, though I of course would revise that opinion if confronted with additional evidence. For reference, I put far more credence to the proposition “Kevin runs Clippy” than to the proposition “Clippy is a real (limited) paperclip-maximizer.”
To clarify, Eliezer Yudkowsky is working both on a book and on the Harry Potter fanfiction in question. Both pertain to rationality.
Are you joking? Clippy is a gimmick poster on the Internet based on a common (if extreme) example.
“He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.”—anonymous
The last time I really checked (which was back in the early days), you had a far higher than normal proportion of posts with negative karma, which is the main thing that I use to evaluate a poster’s status. In general I find total karma to be unreliable because karma seems generally linked to post count (in the old days, this link was quite direct).
However, looking back now I see that your recent comments appear to have been much more generally appreciated. I am not as active as I would like and therefore haven’t seen many of these comments. This was quite an interesting discovery, as it made me aware of a greater need to evaluate status in the present state and account for shifts over time, so thanks, I guess.
I’m curious about this concern. You don’t seem particularly high-status here. You actually seem (at least to me) to have lower status than the average contributor. Are you really concerned about such matters?
Who is “Eliezer Yudowsky?”
“If I can’t easily answer the question or refine my self-model relative to the provided suggestion, I assume that the description is accurate.”
To be frank, I’m skeptical of that heuristic. For “love language,” I literally could not orient myself correctly to answer any of the questions, nor could I honestly describe myself as really matching any of those categories. But I’m quite confident that that doesn’t mean that they’re all true, it just means that none of them apply to me!
Adding the “akrasia” tag would be helpful here.
Yes in all cases, but absolutely only if reversible.
I am asexual and thus have not experienced any of the romantic/sexual emotions. I feel as if doing so would almost certainly help my understanding of others, as well as broaden my emotional range. However, I seem to do quite fine without these emotions, and they seem to cause more problems than they are worth in many of the people around me. Therefore I would only take such pills if they were reversible, as my present state is quite happy and the alternative could certainly be worse.
Would it be reversible?
“Study strategy over the years and achieve the spirit of the warrior. Today is your victory over yourself of yesterday; tomorrow is your victory over lesser men.”
--Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings
“One thousand five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat… and fifteen minutes ago, you knew people were alone on this planet. Think about what you’ll know tomorrow.”—Agent K, “Men in Black”
Ali can be short for several female names, but it can also be a male name.