Ah. But he would want to be more careful than that, because there’s a prophecy, and Voldemort got burned the last time a prophecy was involved.
So he goes out of his way to tear it apart, by bringing Hermione back, for instance, which required the stone, and having the other Tom swear an unbreakable vow.
Upvote for people asking simple questions!
This also leaves me curious. Do other countries have the equivalent of Fox news (ie news specifically for one side of the tribal divide, constantly attacking the other side)?
To be clear, the so called “Liberal Media” / “mainstream media” also contains a lot of tribal narrativization, but Fox news is special (I think?) in being the only major TV news outlet that deviates, and pushes an opposite and antithetical narrative.
I think you’re probably right, but I’m also not sure how much can can infer from the analysis as stated. Maybe you need both First Past the Post and Facebook for things to get this bad, and fixing only one of those things is sufficient.
I guess one way to check would be to compare to other countries with better electoral systems. Are they suffering from the same extreme Left-Right polarization as the US?
I have often felt similarly.
There’s a psychological variable that seems to be able to change on different timescales, in me, at least. I want to gesture at it, and see if anyone can give me pointers to related resources.
[Hopefully this is super basic.]
There a set of states that I occasionally fall into that include what I call “reactive” (meaning that I respond compulsively to the things around me), and what I call “urgy” (meaning that that I feel a sort of “graspy” desire for some kind of immediate gratification).
These states all have some flavor of compulsiveness.
They are often accompanied by high physiological arousal, and sometimes have a burning / clenching sensation in the torso. These all have a kind of “jittery” feeling, and my attention jumps around, or is yanked around. There’s also a way in which this feels “high” on a spectrum, (maybe because my awareness is centered on my head?)
I might be tempted to say that something like “all of these states incline me towards neuroticism.” But that isn’t exactly right on a few counts. (For one thing, the reactions aren’t necessarily irrational, just compulsive.)
In contrast to this, there is another way that I can feel sometimes, which is more like “calm”, “anchored”, settled. It feels “deeper” or “lower” somehow. Things often feel slowed down. My attention can settle, and when it moves it moves deliberately, instead of compulsively. I expect that this correlates with low arousal.
I want to know...
Does this axis have a standardized name? In the various traditions of practice? In cognitive psychology or neuroscience?
Knowing the technical, academic name would be particularly great.
Do people have, or know of, efficient methods for moving along this axis, either in the short term or the long term?
This phenomenon could maybe be described as “length of the delay between stimulus and response”, insofar as that even makes sense, which is one of the benefits noted in the popular branding for meditation.
My recollection of that piece was it was mostly about the fruits of a saner society. In terms of how to get there, the intervention was “have built a systematic science of rationality, 200 years ago.”
Which is a fine plan, on the time scale of 200 years. But are there interventions to deploy in the meantime?
I’m not clear what this is responding to.
That sounds good, but also most outsiders are still going to refer to us as “the rationalists“.
Which is not to say that we can do anything about that, or that we ought to try and change how other people refer to the groups to which we belong.
I just want to highlight that there are at least two separate things that one could mean by the world “rationalist”.
This first is a practitioner of a method, or an aspirant to an ideal, of truth-seeking.
The second is a participant of a particular social cluster.
By the first definition, one might call many scientists or other intellectuals “rationalists” even if they never engage with, or in fact dislike, LessWrong and co.
My impression is that when Eliezer first wrote the sequences, he was using the world in the first sense, as in “how can we become better rationalists?” But, overtime (unsurprisingly), it came to describe the social group of people sprung up around the nucleus of those sequences.
In 2020, most people, if they have an association with the word “rationalist” at all, it is either the philosophical school, or the social group, because many people (say, my parents, or members of the SF tech industry), are not going to know much more about what it means to be a “rationalist” than “Oh. I know some people who are into that.” So our label for a method / ideal naturally turns into a tribal marker.
I think one thing that would be really great is if there was some way to have terms for those two things, without having them inevitably smoosh together.
You could make a poll?
As a side question, does anyone know why a large fraction (maybe half?) of the explanation videos on youtube for this topic are in Hindi? I’ve never seen that pattern for anything else that I’ve been interested in before.
Oh. I misunderstood your question.
You are correct. That was typo. Thanks for noticing.