“Meta-rationalism needs to do everything rationalism does, PLUS deal with its failure modes.”pic.twitter.com/Kf7taTlrTZ
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Well, the issue is that whatever the word chosen is, almost no one will oppose it, and a naming that fails to draw distinctions won't have much usefulness
(Who is against clear thinking!)
The trouble is that such a concept involves being *genuinely* flexible, while all mass movements are basically collections of wrong things we believe because it’s more fun that way.
Yes, “genuinely flexible in application of technical rationality” is pretty much what “meta-rationality” means. OTOH, I think to get there you need to get a much more sophisticated understanding of what “belief” means, and rationalisms are generally actively hostile to doing so.
Isn’t it important to include the non-thinking aspects of skillfully applying mind, such as caring, feeling, intending, intuiting, and attending? The rationalists I know are already pretty good at cognizing; it’s the subtler, squishier aspects of being that often elude them.
Hardly anyone is good enough at ordinary thinking to solve practical problems as hard as “working one’s way out of poverty.” Other stuff matters too but rationalists are very much not already good enough at thinking.
Yes, … although there’s maybe a couple problems there… one is that, put that way, perhaps no one would disagree? And so it invites motte-and-baileying
Rationality often works extremely well, fortunately! It’s rational*ism* that doesn’t work. (Where in this context “rationalism” refers to various theories about how and why rationality works. Rather than meaning that thinking clearly is good, which is obviously true.)
Doesn't it? What demonstrates that it doesn't? As David says "Sufficiently good case studies of meta-rationality ought to convince sincere rationalists by their own tenets". Isn't that the case?
Rationalist means both “connected socially to LessWrong” and “like Descartes”, which are pretty different concepts, neither of which is quite the same as “actually trying to grapple with reality”
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.