= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
loup-vaillant comments on New study on choice blindness in moral positions - 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 (151)
Now that's one ultimate rationalization. The standard pattern is to decide (or prefer) something for one reason, then confabulate more honourable reasons why we decided (or preferred) thus.
But confabulating for something we didn't even decide… that's takings things up a notch.
I bet the root problem is the fact that we often resolve cognitive dissonance before it even hits the concious level. Could we train ourselves to notice such dissonance instead?
This needs to get a spot in CFAR's training program(s/mme(s)?). It sounds like the first thing you'd want to do once you reach the rank of second-circle Initiate in the Bayesian Conspiracy. Or maybe the first part of the test to attain this rank.