If one person insults another, who knows more about how much the insult hurt: the person who delivered it or the person who received it?
"insults another" implies intention here which is a bit of a straw man no? What if they are just offended that I've eaten on Sunday? Or used the language like it is normally used. I don't know maybe we shouldn't be eating on a Sunday or using the language like it is used but this is then probably political value warfare not "refining rationality".
Always assuming the "insulted" person is in the right is bad game theory. Even worse if you just assume that the person doing the "insulting" needs to always change when the insulted person is genuine in expressing their hurtness. On human brains such norms mean that exploiter utility monsters will develop rapidly to pump up all the status they can.
On human brains such norms mean that exploiter utility monsters will develop rapidly to pump up all the status they can.
This is an empirical claim that I am skeptical of. Do you have empirical evidence to support it?
Edit: Grr, why am I getting voted down instead of having my question answered? I don't see what human failure mode you're referring to, although I might see it if you gave a few concrete examples.
I've just launched WorldviewNaturalism.com, which is intended as a simple "landing page" to be used for introducing your friends to scientific naturalism. Many of the recommended readings linked there are written by LWers. Enjoy.
(This is a very old personal project on which I've spent a few hours per month, and it is not at all associated with the Singularity Institute or the Center for Applied Rationality.)