In practice “thinking for yourself” = Being redpilled: Leaving large, loose tribe for small, tight one (60%) Ignorance-veiling: Maintaining composure and 50-50 bothsides priors about everything (30%) “Critical thinking” Ritual, absence-of-evidence skepticism (9%) Real (1%)
-
-
If Poirot doesn’t do some overtaking, the cops in the faster narrative lane will get to the end first, winning the race with the wrong person hanged. Because they’re simply moving faster with their narrative, not because they have better data. How does Poirot change the ending?
Show this thread -
Think about how steering versus staying in your lane works on a straight road. In both cases friction is what allows forward movement, but also produces constant small sideways forces. Going straight = using physics to passively stay pointed ahead.
Show this thread -
What actually steers the car is *changing how friction with the road interacts with the movement of the car*. The steering mechanism reorients wheel to redirect friction so that the sideways friction becomes active. This is like paying more attention in a new direction.
Show this thread -
The road surface has a “grain” of small irregularities (raw data) in every direction. Steering is changing narrative lanes by choosing how to filter the grain with rolling tires. Curve-fitting the car’s path to the road surface by working the friction with rolling rubber.
Show this thread -
If you think of driving straight on a rough uneven road, the role of known data, importance filtering, staying in narrative lanes, looking more moves ahead, choosing whether to go with a particular uniform flow (social proof) or overtake (think for yourself), all become clearer.
Show this thread -
Thinking for yourself is paying relatively more attention to road than to other cars for overtakes. Bigger irregularities are like counterexamples. Everybody goes around left around the pothole, you go right and gain, and so people behind you go right too. Hey you’re leader now!
Show this thread -
Everybody can see the visible road (known data) but minimizes thinking by staying in their narrative lanes, following local social proof leaders who got their roles by their last bit of thinking for themselves. Upcoming turns (new data) are seen by narrative-leaders first.
Show this thread -
“Seeking alpha” by being “ahead of the curve” is like overtaking on the turns. The opportunities to do that depend on the macrostructure of the road. Election results, quarterly earnings, results of key upcoming science experiments: these are overtake-on-the-turn opportunities.
Show this thread -
But waiting for these turns is a reactive thing. You can only respond to opportunities, not create them. People who can really think for themselves don’t need to wait for the turns. They can overtake on the straights too. Bonus: This also gets them first shot at turn overtakes!
Show this thread -
In the analogy this means paying *relatively* more attention to the road than to other cars, compared to other cars. You also have to pay attention to other narratives besides the one you’re flowing with right now because you’re going to weave among them.
Show this thread -
If you do it well enough, for long enough, other cars will start following you, and at some point you’ll be leading a faster dynamic narrative weaving among the slower static stay-in-lane ones, slowly gaining a net speed advantage.
Show this thread -
The faster you go, the more other cars turn into the territory. They’re just a higher-order kind of road friction to use in fitting your path. Imagination helps you see at this higher-level, as others’ narratives turn into your background.
Show this thread -
To get back from the analogy to the conceptual point: thinking for yourself means consistently surprising people with new angles, whether or not there is new data to work with, to the point that others start following you.
Show this thread -
You turn into a leader attracting converts from existing narratives, and craft a new one that treats the existing narratives as the terrain. You don’t fit their ideas of ‘lanes’ (tribal partisanship paths) because you are laying dynamic new ‘weaving’ lanes at the next level.
Show this thread -
So to think for yourself, you need intelligence yes, imagination, yes, but mainly you need nerve. And if it works, the willingness to lead. At least for a while.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.