The rationalist community and @robinhanson in particular, have a practice of refusing to engage with others in terms they find acceptable and attributing all sorts of epistemological failings or cynicism to anything they dislike rather than seeing them arising from differnces in
-
-
Replying to @glenweyl @JaysonVirissimo
Seems you are publicly accusing me of refusing to engage with someone sometime on something, though not offering enough detail to let anyone check on your claim, or me to disprove it.
2 replies 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @robinhanson @JaysonVirissimo
I am not accusing you of a particular unwillingness to engage with someone on something in particular. I am describing a general attitude of disregard for the argumentative practices of most others (e.g. the value signalling issue) which you are quite proud of.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @glenweyl @JaysonVirissimo
Hm, it seems even harder to prove or disprove a claim of a "general attitude of disregard". I can say that I am more interdisciplinary than are most scholars & have mastered & used more diverse methods, & drawn on more literatures. That doesn't look to me like general disregard.
1 reply 0 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @robinhanson @JaysonVirissimo
I like that very much about you and agree. Many standard academics are much narrower. You and the rationalist community gathered around you have a very strong "internalist" attitude and a general approach towards those who don't share those community attitudes.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @glenweyl @JaysonVirissimo
Throwing out the word "internalist" doesn't do much to clarify your accusations of "refusing to engage" and "attitude of disregard". Internal to what, and must someone focused on internals disregard and not engage?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
He's simply pointing out your autonomous thinking, which is quite typical for the rationalist community. This is in contrast to the debates among normies, where participants are expected to operate within an intersubjective consensus reality, and get punished when they diverge.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Sounds like you are saying that I disagree with some things that others accept. Guilty as charged, though I don't see how that relates to these other claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I share your sensibilities; I am bad at emulating and participating in group think. However, I notice that most people instinctively privilege group norms over individual thought, and it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @robinhanson and
Related post: https://conversableeconomist.blogspot.com/2019/11/interview-with-cass-sunstein-on-abrupt.html?m=1 …pic.twitter.com/iNsGpus3Dd
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Fascinating. I wonder if there are people who drop out of a movement once it exceeds a certain threshold.
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.