I believe there are many ways of dividing sets, and one of them is people who work hard to maintain accurate and connected views of the world, and those who seem to believe what feels right to them. I like being told I’m wrong for the same reason that I like cognitive dissonance; it is the comforting bump of being kept on track. So thanks for ignoring my bombastic tone and guiding me when I need it.
eltimbalino
Karma: −2
I agree with preferring intentional friction to be non-destructive. But while money is a useful medium to convert friction into, it will always cause more friction for those who have less money. I have written a post to explore this and other options for friction here:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QqdrXf69NtJD4usGH/rethinking-friction-equity-and-motivation-across-domains
The “Snow is white” example bothered me every time. I suppose it is because I believe a single snow flake is transparent, and snow becomes white as these transparent snow flakes refract that light around more. I know snow looks white. I would have felt more comfortable with an item that was pigment white, that does equally reflect the visible spectrum, when providing an example of an incontrovertible fact.