I think truels are a game-theoretic structure that suggests that there are costs to (short-sighted) "winning", just as there are costs to "truth-seeking".

I found the post interesting... except for this penultimate paragraph; I don't think there's a good analogy here. An evolutionary motive for "choking" or signaling choking is an interesting enough observation on its own.

LW is on refining the art of thinking; there's no need to strain for the segues.

(To be specific about where the analogy is strained: One question is about whether common human goals are likely to conflict with epistemic rationality; the other question is about signaling short-term failure as a road to long-term success under clearly defined criteria. Standard instrumental versus terminal goals, which is not at all as thorny as alleged instrumental epistemic stupidity.)