My objection is not to rationality: if the ontological choices are made effectively, then rational methods are often extraordinarily valuable. Yay science, engineering, medicine, etc!
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and
My suggestion is that rationality can be made more effective by teaching people that the ontological choices must be made deliberately, not by default, and teaching skills for ontology choice or construction.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and
I'll do the paranoid thing here and say this sounds like trying to smuggle in pomo-ish ontological relativism through the back door (or meta door, in this case).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FPallopides @ESYudkowsky and
Yes; the main point of the book is to explain meta-rationality, which is about how to make ontological choices *well*. It’s not relativist at all; quite the opposite.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @FPallopides and
It’s specifically meant to help STEM people who have realized that there can be no ultimate foundation to knowledge, and are thereby thrown into pomo-ish nihilism. It gives a STEM-ish answer for how to proceed. This post explains that:https://meaningness.com/metablog/stem-fluidity-bridge …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and
Well, that was quite a slam-dunk falsification of my paranoia
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FPallopides @ESYudkowsky and
I’m glad! (Feeling paranoid is no fun)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and
One piece of belated but (I think) important feedback: Reading "A bridge to meta-rationality" & the Kegan model summary post linked from there, I repeatedly caught myself thinking, "uh-huh, true, this feels like my own journey, good to know I'm totes meta-rational". >
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FPallopides @Meaningness and
> This is a problem. One the one hand, it means you did a great job making these things salient. On the other, there's a danger of these articles doing what I think
@robinhanson described as "making the reader feel good rather than making them change their behavior/thinking." >1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FPallopides @Meaningness and
> I'm not sure how that can be avoided, but I think it needs to be. What might help is giving examples of what being meta-rational is not, e.g. anecdotes of ppl thinking they got there but they didn't. Or statements that make no sense if you haven't got there. or, idk. >
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
This is a really interesting suggestion, thanks! I will try and do that. Many readers have asked for positive examples to clarify the concept; you are the first to suggest negative ones, which seems a clearly good idea.
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.