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!
My first concern is that people may tend to excel in lists of items that they draw up. The areas where one is likely to be weak may include areas which one doesn't value enough to either list or develop. That said, I'll discuss the weaknesses I see in Roko on the listed skills. I won't discuss his strengths because I have some of the weaknesses Eliezer listed in "Why Our Kind Can't Cooperate" and its successor posts.
I would say that "be curious" is the place where Roko needs the most work, at least compared to our typical crowd. Because he has leadership potential, "know your own mind" may be a higher utility place for him to focus though, as its long tail risks are larger
I was going to say Black Swan risks, but that's laughably wrong, I couldn't know very easily where the largest Black Swan risks are, though curiosity seems likely to catch them best, but I know perfectly well what the known, established long tail risks of leaders not knowing their minds are.
Without cultivated "eye on prize" and curiosity I suspect that analytic philosophy is a weakness rather than a strength. Likewise, resisting thoughtcrime is more likely to be a weakness if not coupled to knowing one's mind.
by the way, can you point me to the literature on this:
Thanks!