Yes, very much that. I just suspect you're being coy when making blanket statements like the OP that you know requires a bucketload of interpretation to evaluate and I sorta want to call you out on it 
-
-
Replying to @everytstudies @reasonisfun
Ah… what would be a better approach, do you think?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @reasonisfun
Depends on what you're trying to do exactly, doesn't it? I think most people confronted with the assertion that the world doesn't make sense would take the wrong message from it. I did when I first read your stuff.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @everytstudies @reasonisfun
Ah, that’s interesting. What’s the wrong message, and how can I communicate the right one more effectively, or prevent the misunderstanding?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @reasonisfun
In my mind the wrong message would be that there is no reality out there and it's all in our minds, or that all knowledge is completely subjective (everything equally valid) and other such boogeymen.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @everytstudies @reasonisfun
Yes, this is an expositional problem. There’s 200 years of people (Romantics) saying rationalism is wrong for reasons X. I explicitly reject that analysis, and say rationalism is wrong for reasons Y, which are unfamiliar to rationalists (although not unique to me).
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
I need to prevent the misunderstanding that I’m just reiterating the tired wrong arguments X. The Eggplant attempts that by devoting the introduction to saying how great rationality is, and how it’s under threat, and that strengthening it is critical. Will that be enough?
4 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Maybe my perspective is useful, because I came to your stuff as a fairly blank slate. I am a scientist, rationality seems to be the way I solve problems & gain understanding, but I've read a bit of Kahneman & know that's not the whole picture. 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mrgunn @Meaningness and
I had to read quite far into your stuff, David, before I understood what you were trying to say. I initially had a lot of resistance to your criticisms of rationality because I couldn't see what was on the other side of nebulosity. 2/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mrgunn @Meaningness and
I don't know if any other exposition would help get me across the gap you describe as stage 4 - 5 faster, though. I think there's an irreducible amount of effort required to get what you're trying to say. 3/
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Yes, we shouldn’t expect it to be any easier to learn meta-rationality than to learn rationality. Several years of hard work, with lots of confusion at first. Harder, in fact, because undergrad STEM eduction is largely rationality training, but there’s no curriculum for metarat
-
-
Yeah, I went through that training. There was *some* discussion of Kuhn in grad school & some stuff about research methods, but overall it was all about finding your niche, not seeing the broader picture. What would metarat 101 look like?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I tried to sketch a curriculum here… needs a huge amount more work to fill it out, which will have to be an effort by many people, but this is a start:https://meaningness.com/metablog/meta-rationality-curriculum …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.