pjeby comments on Extreme Rationality: It's Not That Great - Less Wrong

140 Post author: Yvain 09 April 2009 02:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (269)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ciphergoth 10 April 2009 10:16:53AM *  3 points [-]

A top-level post would be very welcome, I don't want to take this one too far off track. I've slept (and continue to sleep) with a lot of people, and my experience very much contradicts what you say here.

Comment author: pjeby 10 April 2009 03:17:01PM *  6 points [-]

roland:

So you have to be aware that there is a fundamental difference in the objectives of the two which will make it extremely difficult or impossible to make BOTH happy at the same time.

ciphergoth:

my experience very much contradicts what you say here.

That's because it's a great example of theory being used to persuade people to take a certain set of "actions that work". There are other theories that contradict those theories, that are used to get other people to take action... even though the specific actions taken may be quite similar!

People self-select their schools of dating and self-help based on what theories appeal to them, not on the actual actions those schools recommend taking. ;-)

In this case, the theory roland is talking about isn't theory at all: it's a sales pitch, that attracts people who feel that dating is an unfair situation. They like what they hear, and they want to hear more. So they read more and maybe buy a product. The writer or speaker then gradually moves from this ev-psych "hook" to other theories that guide the reader to take the actions the author recommends.

That people confuse these sales pitches with actual theory is a well-understood concept within the Marketing Conspiracy. ;-) Of course, the gurus don't always know themselves what parts of their theories are hook vs. "real"... I just found out recently that a bunch of stuff I thought was "real" was actually "hook", and had to go through some soul-searching before deciding to leave it in the book I'm writing.

Why? Because if I change the hook, I won't be able to reach people who have the same wrong beliefs that I did. Better to hook people with wrong things they already believe, and then get them to take the actions that will get them to the place where they can throw off those beliefs. (And of course, believing those things didn't stop me from making progress.) But I've restricted it to being only in chapter 1, and the revelation of the deeper model will happen by chapter 5.

Anyway. Actually helping people change their actions and beliefs -- as opposed to merely telling them what they should do or think -- is the very Darkest of the Dark arts.

Perhaps we should call it "The Coaching Conspiracy". ;-)