Very interesting point. But I would adjust the percentages. Bad faith has to account for much of the incorrigibility we see on Twitter (in my timeline, I would put it at more than 50%).
This brilliant point by @ESYudkowsky explains about 75% of why it's hard to change people's minds through Twitter.https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/HLqWn5LASfhhArZ7w/expecting-short-inferential-distances …
-
-
-
Hypothesis: any sufficiently extreme inferential distance is indistinguishable from bad faith.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
If this is true, college professors should excel at changing people's minds through Twitter since grading students forces us to confront inferential distances.
-
The problem is, you can walk back your explanations only so far in the span of 280 characters. Too much distance for the time and character allotment available.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Great post by Yudkowsky. I link to it frequently.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks for sharing this wonderful site and group of people.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Excellent. Reinforces to me, the teaching approach of “how evolutionists think” framework.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The first part of this essay is very well done. An example of where I (and others) have some loosely organized thoughts in the same vein, but he puts it together perfectly.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's one of his best!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“If you don’t recurse far enough, you’re just talking to yourself.”Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.