Julia GalefVerified account

@juliagalef

Author of THE SCOUT MINDSET and host of the Rationally Speaking podcast

juliagalef.com
Joined January 2009
1,144 Photos and videos Photos and videos

Tweets

You blocked @juliagalef

Are you sure you want to view these Tweets? Viewing Tweets won't unblock @juliagalef

  1. Retweeted
    28 Dec 2021

    My oldest issued a challenge tonight: if he can find 9 friends to agree to play, I need to get him the Most Preposterous Board Game Ever Designed.

    16 replies 33 retweets 195 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  2. Retweeted
    23 Dec 2021

    “Value of information!” is what I usually say before doing something reckless.

    Apart from "life is short" what other lines do you use before making bad decisions?
    Show this thread
    7 replies 14 retweets 160 likes
    Undo
  3. 23 Dec 2021

    A lot of people dislike the idea of helping the poor by just giving them cash -- but it's usually the best way. On my new Rationally Speaking episode of makes the case for cash transfers. Audio + transcript: A quote I like:

    32 replies 145 retweets 638 likes
    Undo
  4. 11 Dec 2021

    On my new podcast episode, I talk to the brilliant philosopher Toby Ord about all the ways humanity could wreck our future, why he came to take this issue more seriously, and which existential risks are overrated vs. underrated Audio + full transcript:

    10 replies 26 retweets 215 likes
    Undo
  5. 6 Dec 2021

    This is happening in an hour! I'll be chatting with from Heterodox Academy about reasoning and truth-seeking, and there'll be plenty of time for audience Q&A

    Tomorrow, 7 pm ET! 📣 Join us for a conversation with , author of the Scout Mindset, as we discuss the ways our brains are wired for tribalism and confirmation bias—and the habits we can form to overcome these tendencies and see the world more clearly 👇
    1 reply 4 retweets 40 likes
    Undo
  6. 6 Dec 2021

    Here's making these points in the New Yorker at the time:

    4 replies 8 retweets 93 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  7. 6 Dec 2021

    So we have a group of people, reporting that they somewhat enjoyed being alone with their thoughts, & some of them chose to self-administer a small shock out of curiosity I wouldn't summarize that as "People would rather shock themselves than be alone with their thoughts"

    5 replies 11 retweets 211 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  8. 6 Dec 2021

    On average, people in the "electric shock" study rated thinking as ~somewhat enjoyable. And that statement is true even just for the subset of people who chose to shock themselves. Most people who chose to shock themselves said they did it just because they were curious

    5 replies 3 retweets 135 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  9. 6 Dec 2021

    I often see people cite that first paper ("people would rather endure electric shocks than be alone with their thoughts") But IMO it's yet another example of a sensational conclusion that's not supported by the actual data in the study...

    I am haunted by two papers on how much we hate hard thinking: ⚡️2/3 of men & 1/4 of women choose to shock themselves rather than sit & think for 6-15 minutes 🔥28% of people chose pain they rated as "extremely intense" for 20 seconds over spending 20 seconds solving a hard puzzle
    Show this thread
    9 replies 33 retweets 285 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  10. 6 Dec 2021

    Here's another example. (I know some people did actually defend the stronger interpretation here ("Silicon Valley is more sexist than other industries"), but I also heard people claim it only meant the weaker thing ("Silicon Valley is more sexist than it should be"))

    8 replies 3 retweets 69 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  11. 6 Dec 2021

    Here’s a tricksy motte-and-bailey I keep noticing: “Group X is so Y” [where Y is a bad trait] The provocative implied meaning is "Group X is unusually Y, relative to other groups" But if pressed, people can claim they only meant “Group X is more Y than it should be” Example:

    12 replies 16 retweets 192 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  12. Retweeted
    5 Dec 2021

    Tomorrow, 7 pm ET! 📣 Join us for a conversation with , author of the Scout Mindset, as we discuss the ways our brains are wired for tribalism and confirmation bias—and the habits we can form to overcome these tendencies and see the world more clearly 👇

    3 replies 17 retweets 80 likes
    Undo
  13. 2 Dec 2021

    Kevin explains why pandemic prediction research isn't worth it, EVEN IF it could help us avoid natural pandemics:

    9 replies 13 retweets 67 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  14. 2 Dec 2021

    I found 's argument in my podcast compelling and disturbing. Now I'm wondering if anyone is making the opposing case. If others are genuinely NOT worried about scientists telling the world how to engineer terrible pandemics, I want to hear why not.

    New Rationally Speaking episode! Pandemic prediction research is supposed to make us safer, but is actually giving thousands of people access to weapons of mass destruction. MIT scientist makes the case:
    Show this thread
    15 replies 9 retweets 126 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  15. 2 Dec 2021

    3) The Hudson River School (Dad took this on a walk in Rock Creek Park, near DC)

    3 replies 2 retweets 71 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  16. 2 Dec 2021

    2) Maxfield Parrish (the sky on our street, at sunset)

    2 replies 4 retweets 63 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  17. 2 Dec 2021

    My dad has taken some photos lately that remind me so much of particular painters / schools of painting. Some examples: 1) Edward Hopper (this is a house in our neighborhood, in early morning light)

    5 replies 7 retweets 144 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  18. 1 Dec 2021

    I'm also very interested in the epistemic status of each field. (The methodology question is a way of getting at this.) Like, how much can I trust a random paper in field X? How much can I trust a consensus in field X? etc.

    10 replies 6 retweets 249 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  19. 1 Dec 2021

    Here's something I wish existed... For each scientific field, a ELI5-style summary of the - most important progress made in the last 50 years - biggest open questions people are working on - typical methodology used (e.g. case studies, surveys, looking for correlations in data)

    52 replies 191 retweets 1,818 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  20. 30 Nov 2021

    2) "Dissolving the Fermi paradox" Shows that Fermi paradox ("Why haven't we encountered aliens yet?") kinda goes away when you properly incorporate uncertainty into your model, which people hadn't been doing

    16 replies 51 retweets 844 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo

@juliagalef hasn't Tweeted yet.

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.

    You may also like

    ·