paper-machine comments on Ritual Report: Schelling Day - Less Wrong

29 Post author: ModusPonies 17 April 2013 03:46AM

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

Comments (113)

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

Comment author: Vaniver 21 April 2013 11:27:27PM *  3 points [-]

I suppose I should've used my free will to ignore the negative conditioning being applied to me? I'll go do that as soon as I acquire free will.

This isn't a goal you automatically succeed at; responding appropriately to criticism is a skill that takes development. I've put quite a bit of effort into training my skill at this, and am pleased with how far I have gotten, but recognize I still have a ways to go. In particular, I'm afraid I haven't put much effort into developing my ability to train others; I'd recommend talking to Val about it; he should be able to teach you much more effectively than I can.

The primary technique that I use that's communicable is to try and use defensiveness as a trigger for curiosity. That association is very useful, but I'm not sure what sort of practice would help teach it. Perhaps a helpful visualization is to try and 'slide' down from combativeness into curiosity.

Perspective alteration is also useful. People aren't responding to you, but to what you created; Julia has a neat visualization trick of seeing people's positions (including her own) as somewhat displaced from them during arguments. If Caledonian has something mean to say about one of your posts, well, it's attacking your post, not you. (And even if he says something along the lines of "Eliezer is a big meanie head," well, it could easily be the case that the Eliezer model in Caledonian's mind is a big meanie head, but you don't have to interpret that as an attack.)

And once you have distance from it, you can remove the tone and focus on the substance, and see whether or not you can use the substance to make yourself stronger.

Comment author: [deleted] 21 April 2013 11:30:16PM 3 points [-]

If Caledonian has something mean to say about one of your posts, well, it's attacking your post, not you.

Were you around back then? Caledonian was attacking posts because it knew it was getting under people's skin.

Comment author: Vaniver 21 April 2013 11:41:15PM *  -1 points [-]

Were you around back then?

Nope; I only saw his comments when reading through the sequences, and thought they were often sharp (in both senses of the word). There are no doubt selection effects at play in which ones still existed for me to read them.

Caledonian was attacking posts because it knew it was getting under people's skin.

To which the obvious response is to not let it get under your skin, and if you lack that level of control over your skin, to deliberately develop it.

To quote ShannonFriedman from another post:

Today I know that if an agenty person has to write bylaws and they don't have experience, they go off and read about how to write bylaws.

(Replacing 'write bylaws', of course, with 'respond positively to criticism.')

Comment author: [deleted] 22 April 2013 12:44:30AM 0 points [-]

To which the obvious response is to not let it get under your skin, and if you lack that level of control over your skin, to deliberately develop it.

Willpower isn't an infinite resource.

Comment author: PrawnOfFate 22 April 2013 12:59:47PM -1 points [-]

But being able to handle criticism properly is a very important rational skill. Those who feel they cannot do it need to adjust their levels of self-advertisement as rationalists accordingly.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 22 April 2013 02:14:50PM 2 points [-]

being able to handle criticism properly is a very important rational skill

You are absolutely right. Some parts of this very important rational skill are: properly discerning genuine criticism from trolling; properly discerning whether the person posting it is a useful or a harmful presence in the forum; properly deciding a useful course of action.

I think that Eliezer has indeed demonstrated possession of this very important rational skill in his handling of V_V's criticism.