I got some good ideas from this list, and will report back with results.
Most of these seem like hacks to increase extroversion.
For #12, shouldn’t three star reviews divide (one star + five star reviews), not be subtracted?
Ideopunk
Karma: 529
[Question] Autoexperiments
Hi all!
I’ve been reading SSC for years, and took the plunge to read the sequences last year. It shifted a lot of my previous beliefs, and though I have a strong aversion to group identity, I suppose I’m an “aspiring rationalist” now!
About me: I work in Kelowna, BC. I’ve written for Quillette and Areo in the past, but my current writing output is confined to Letter (including this conversation on metarationality). I will probably do effortposts here eventually, but for now I’m mostly scanning for coronavirus information.
Any rationalists or effective altruists in BC, message me!
Second-Order Existential Risk
100 Tips for a Better Life
These are useful criticisms! I’ll caveat it later towards trusted friends, which I think cuts off much of the risks.
Thanks!
It’s not near the top of my mind either, but it is something I feel confident recommending to almost everybody, whereas I don’t feel confident advising people on their financial investments. This is a small fruit, but it’s low-hanging.
Yeah, I think the Reddit solution will lose its value over time. I think the important part is to find an argument (this applies to Hacker News too).
I’d be interested to find another take on #69, I think that’s one I came up with on my own through trial and error.
76 was originally disclaimed with “wait a year before trying to be friends”, which maybe should be added back in. I think friendship with exes is often doable eventually, it’s the immediate aftermath where I think people handle themselves poorly and add trouble to whatever trouble made them break up.
I of course agree (with original parent comment) that there are real problems and real solutions. I think three things are needed to qualify as a grifter, as compared to an honest informer.
1) The sell. A grifter doesn’t just tell you there’s a problem, they will share the solution for a price. If you give them money (or control), they’ll relieve your worry.
2) The exclusivity. Alternative solutions are specifically highlighted as being insufficient or counterproductive. Somebody engaging in good-faith can acknowledge the costs and benefits of different approaches (while still believing their solution is best).
3) The promise. Grifts promise a solution, not just a tool. An honest informer will have ideas about what can help, but won’t guarantee their success.
I think somebody can fit two of these three and still be in good-faith.
Is there a way to see all the nominations listed? I registered in 2020 so I can’t vote but I’d still love to pick through the nominations.
A Simple Ethics Model
This is interesting. Am I wrong in summarizing it as “deontology helps with coordination”?
This was a rich read, thank you!
Come hang out!
This is an excellent post. I expect (and hope!) it will shape how I handle disagreements.
”The person counters every objection raised, but the counters aren’t logically consistent with each other.”
Is there a particular term for this? This is something I’ve encountered before, and having a handle for it might help with addressing it.
Aha! Thank you.
From my reading, he’s much more scout than postmodern soldier in his lectures https://foucault.info/parrhesia/foucault.DT1.wordParrhesia.en/ -- and as a bonus, a much easier read.
This seems correct to me. There are already self-improvement approaches to attempt and modify. Using epistemic rationality to achieve instrumental rationality is less about creating an RSI, and more about evaluating and improving upon existing SIs.