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: 530
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!
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.
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.
Come hang out, shy pals!
This event is cancelled. I will not be there in time due to Hurricane Fiona, and cannot guarantee another host. Big apologies!
This event is no longer cancelled!
Woooo!
Fixed, thanks!
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.