Note: This was originally posted in the discussion area, but motions to move it to the top level were made.
-----
My own desire to improve my rationality coupled with some posts criticizing LessWrong not too long ago led to an idea. For reference, the posts I mean are these:
- Goals for which LessWrong does (and doesn't) help
- Self-Improvement of Shiny Distraction: Why LessWrong is anti-instrumental Rationality
- A comment on Humans are not automatically strategic
Unfortunately, I don't know of any resources to help people traverse the path you're facing in a series of small safe steps.
- Most interesting to me was the idea of some form of "rationality comb." An iterative evaluation process. Again, I hardly consider myself the one to design this, but perhaps something like:
- Take 5 minutes and brainstorm about the beliefs you think affect your actions the most
- Focus on the first belief, set(1):belief(1)
- Can you recall how you came to hold this belief?
- What are some common alternative views to your belief?
- Do you think you could provide testable justification for your current belief over the above alternatives?
- If not, can you imagine leaving your belief for one of the alternatives?
- And so on...
- Then repeat with set(1):belief(2). When set(1):belief(n) is finished... re-brainstorm for 5min to come up with set(2):belief(1)...belief(n).
- A series of "homework" problems on Bayesian Probability, perhaps including EY's tutorial and other helpful material.
- Brain teasers or similar items to focus on attentiveness to details, weighing evidence, knowing the limits of what you can know given certain information, etc. I think LW has already provided some good examples of neat things like this (even if they would require refinement).
- Questions that intentionally try to deceive the reader with some form of fallacy or bias
- Tutorials on how to have rational discussions, rules of engagement, reaching a mutual conclusion, etc.
I agree re. an included workbook and to clarify, when I said "go along with it" I meant "related/parallel content," not "physically attached."
I think a downloadable PDF (easily accessible, easily revised/updated) for little or no cost would be optimal. I'd be willing to pay for it to cover the time and effort invested by other LWers. I'd also volunteer my time for free to the project as an organizer/assembler to assist those willing to supply/decide the actual content. I have a decent amount of experience with writing technical manuals and a fair amount of experience using LaTeX, which would lend itself well to the writing of an organized, footnoted workbook type of publication.
If perhaps two more agree with this, I'll do it... otherwise forcefully suggest it and I'll do it based on your recommendation alone. Again, I really have no idea what constitutes a top-level-worthy post!
Please move this to the main page. I'd love to see it done; I don't know if there's anything I could contribute in the way of time and knowledge.
I also second (third?) the suggestion for trying to make it a companion to The Art of Rationality. Desrtopa, why do you think fewer people would buy it if they came together? Is it because books with workbooks attached look intimidating?