I can't see mine, but I have a fact that seems very likely to help pointing in the right direction: I can't seem to find any USE of rationality, and thus cant do any kind of trials or calibrations. I never have to make non-obvious decisions with large enough stakes to be worth spending more than 5 seconds on. Most large scale important things like long term goals I've just read from the sequences and don't need determining myself. I never seem to need a truth I can't just get from goggle. Outside of artistic output there seem to be almost no indications I'm generally intelligent. Possessing any kind of system 2 thinking seems to be a clear net negative for me, I'm almost always better of acting on instinct and naive heuristics.
Obviously, it can't reasonably BE that way, but it SEEMS that way from the inside, and the illusion is extraordinarily robust and complete.
I think I've thought of a way you can attempt to deconstruct this illusion.
If it really is extraordinarily robust and complete, then you should be able to lay out a brief summary of all of your decisions with large stakes, and a 1 sentence explanation of why you chose them.
If there are any obviously flawed statements then they should stand out as being less robust to other people.
If there are any large areas you just don't mention as a large stakes decision, that would probably also stand out as being less complete to other people.
If you find that you can'...
It has been noticed since the time immemorial that cognitive biases have a nasty tendency of being invisible to self (note the proverbial log in one's eye). Uncovering their own blind spot is probably the hardest task for an aspired rationalist. EY and others have devoted a number of posts to this issue (e.g. the How To Actually Change Your Mind sequence), and I am wondering if it is bearing fruit for the LW participants.
To this end, I suggest that people post what they think their current rationality blind spot they are struggling with is (not the usual sweet success stories of "overcoming bias"), and let others comment on whether they agree or not, given their impressions of the person here and possibly in real life. My guess is that most of us would miss the mark widely (it's called a blind spot for a reason). Needless to say, if you post, you should expect to get crockered. Also needless to say, if you disagree with a person pointing out your bias, odds are that you are the one who is wrong.
(Who, me, go first? Oh, I have no biases, at least none that I can see.)