You raise excellent points here, and I’m sympathetic to the approach you are taking. I certainly agree that minimizing conflict is worthwhile. On other points, the best way forward is not clear to me. Let me point out some possible objections and alternatives…
The main question for my readers now is probably “what even is this supposed thing ‘metarationality’? does it exist? why should I care about it?” So I see step 1 as pointing out as clearly as possible what it is, which involves pointing out how it’s different from rationality.
-
-
For anyone who holds rationality as a religion, that’s inevitably going to be confrontive, even if I emphasize that metarationality is in no way opposed to rationality, and indeed that neither can operate without the other *at all*.
-
see I think it's things like this "people who hold rationality as a religion", that make it hard to parse for specifically rationalists that you'd want to make the transition. I think this reads as outright insulting to them (not to me, I fully get the point you're making)
- 13 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.