Last time, I wrote about 11 core rationalist skills. Now I would like some help from the LW community: which of these skills am I good at, which ones am I bad at? Just to recap, the skills are:
- Actually want an accurate map
- Keep your eyes on the prize
- Entangle yourself with the evidence
- Be Curious
- Aumann-update
- Know standard Biases
- Know Probability theory
- Know your own mind
- Be well calibrated
- Use analytic philosophy
- Resist Thoughtcrime
I'll post a description of each one of these skills as a comment, and if you think I am good at that skill, vote it up. If you think I am bad at it, vote it down. Don't be too shy - even if you are biased or uncertain - because over the course of many votes, these biases and errors will cancel out to some extent. (This is the "guess the number of beans in a jar by asking 50 people to guess and taking the average" method)
EDIT: We can also comment on each rationalist skill to say how well I am doing at that skill. Later today, I will do this myself.
Thanks in advance!
The usual approach with this kind of thing is to include another comment as a karma sink for those who desire one. That can be expected to increase the accuracy of the feedback you infer.
I like the idea approach you are taking here. Proactive and rather bold. I've added a few votes here and there. I have to note, however, that I while I have a general positive impression of your posts I haven't built up a particularly clear model of how you think. This is, all else being equal a good thing. I mostly form models of people's thought processes when they have obvious biasses that I find damn irritating.
Downvote some of the things you think I am bad at, or less good at. I appreciate the feedback!