= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jonathan_Graehl comments on Scholarship: How to Do It Efficiently - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (141)
Certainly. That seems to be common. But also I understand new material better when I rewrite it in my own words even without the intent to share those words with others.
This is true for me also, and the primary reason I blog. If I weren't doing that, I'd be emailing a friend who'd be interested, or failing that, writing to my diary.
I haven't thought about this before, but it seems like in (pretending to) communicate your assessment of the evidence, that you risk amplifying consistency bias unless you cultivate "I update on new evidence and publicly admit (and diagnose post-mortem) when I was wrong" as a cherished part of your persona.