This strikes me as a good sort of constructive feedback, but one that didn’t apply in my case, and I’ll try to explain why. Thinking real instead of fake seems like a canonical example of rationality that is especially contingent upon emotions and subjective experience, and intervening on that level is extremely tricky and fraught.
In my case, the copious examples, explanations of why the examples are relevant, pointers to ways of avoiding the bad/getting at the good, etc. mostly seemed helpful in conveying the right pre-rational mental patterns for allowing the relevant rational thoughts to occur (either by getting out of the way or by participating in the generation of rational thought directly).
It was also simply enjoyable throughout, in a way that harkened back a little to when I would read C.S. Lewis as a still-religious teenager. Not imitation of Lewis’s writing, but rather pointing in the direction Lewis was trying to point (toward truth, beauty and goodness). This last element seems potentially load bearing, in that I don’t know whether I’d have found the continuous details helpful if I hadn’t found them intellectually pleasant in this particular way.
I’m glad this kind of content exists on LessWrong: writing that doesn’t shy away from an explicit focus on personal virtue, in a “how algorithms feel from the inside” kind of way. I used to devour anything I could find written by C.S. Lewis as a still-religious teenager, because I felt a certain quality of thought and feeling emanating from each page. I felt the sincerity of effort orienting towards truth, beauty, and goodness.
Unfortunately, much of his worldview turned out to be importantly wrong, but his writings are hardly alone in that compared to other genuine historical truth seekers. I hope that like this post, my future thinking can manage to orient in that direction which Lewis was among the first to bring before my attention.