"You deserve newborn love" is an uplifting statement. "You NEED to care of your ELEPHANT" sends strong "hey emotions, fuck you, just shut up already" signal
Conversation
also implicitly identifies the self with the rider rather than the elephant! that never sat well with me
1
13
I strongly identified with rational parts, rider, system 1, etc, then realized I am doing something wrong
2
5
Replying to
one of the many funny bits about this for me is i think it’s common for rationalists to believe that system 2 or whatever has goals and desires that are in conflict with system 1’s
this is not at all how it works imo. system 2 is not capable of wanting anything
“system 2,” depending on where boundaries are drawn, is at best capable of storing abstract statements about what one *should* want, which is completely different. those statements only have force because of genuine wants in “system 1,” eg wanting to fit in, to seem reasonable
2
1
10
I think "System 2" implicitly includes background fear (one of examples of S2 on Wiki is "determine the appropriateness of social behaviour" which is fast and subconscious.) And this fear may be indeed in conflict with everything
2
1
Show replies
I don’t think System 2 is exactly real.
I’m pretty sure I sometimes have an authentic (not socially imposed) drive to make sense of things, organize things, fiddle with things till they fit, etc. and that can include formal abstractions.
1
7
yeah, at some point “system 1” and “system 2” are just not very useful categories. i agree that these are real drives and if i had to i’d shove them into “system 1” but i’m not at all married to this
Show more replies