= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MugaSofer comments on Rationalists Are Less Credulous But Better At Taking Ideas Seriously - 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 (285)
Thank you for the response.
I'd like to hear this from a financial expert. Do we have any who'd like to speak on this?
Oh? What will modafinil do for me? (Will google and return to this thread, but if someone wants to recommend some links with concentrated useful info, it would be appreciated.)
I also have some objections to this sort of "obvious win" that do not depend on what modafinil's specific effects are: namely, that "deciding to start taking a drug without the advice and supervision of a licensed medical professional is bad" seems to be a decent heuristic to live by. It's not unalterable, but it seems good to a first approximation. Do you disagree?
Forgive me for my ignorance: so this guy has lots of Bitcoin now? What can you buy with Bitcoin? Can you just convert the Bitcoin into dollars? If so, how much money did this person make from this?
My suspicion is that these examples are actually more like "it's not clear whether these things are, in fact, even wins for the people who did them, never mind whether they will be wins for other people who are considering doing them". I was really looking for something more unambiguous than that.
I will comment more when I've investigated / received clarifications on the examples you've provided. In the meantime I would love to see more examples.
So - holding up Said, and for that matter my own memories, as evidence - most people simply haven't considered these options.
Which ... checks ... does fit with the original criteria:
I don't think it does, actually. The following are three distinct scenarios (as pertain to my point #2):
1. Being entirely unaware of what options/possibilities exist in some domain.
Example: I don't do any investing, and so, prior to this thread, had no opinion on index funds whatsoever, nor on mutual funds, nor on anything related.
2. Being unaware of some* particular* (potentially counterintuitive) idea or option.
Example: I'd never had anyone recommend modafinil to me, or suggest that I should take it, or explain what benefits it might have.
3. Being aware of some idea or option, but not taking it seriously.
Example: I have no idea. Gaming poorly-designed lotteries? I suspect this example fails for other reasons, but it does fit the criterion #2.
The claim, as I understand it, was:
There are numerous cases like scenario 3 above, where the main thing that keeps people from taking advantage of an opportunity, and winning thusly, is not taking some idea seriously — despite being aware of that idea. Rationalists, on the other hand, do take the idea seriously, and win thusly.
Index funds are not a good example for people who have no knowledge of investing, because what kept me, for instance, from taking advantage of the profit opportunities offered by the idea "invest in index funds" was not having any knowledge of investing whatsoever, not some failure to take things seriously.
Modafinil is not a good example for people not aware of modafinil or its (alleged) positive effects, because what kept me, for instance, from taking advantage of the cognitive boosts offered by the idea "take modafinil" was not being aware of modafinil, not some failure to take things seriously.
I haven't gotten a good response about Bitcoin, so I won't comment on that.
Now, don't get me wrong: I think index funds are a good example in general, based on the very helpful and clear comments I've gotten on that topic (thank you, commenters!). (Modafinil is not as clearly a good example. I'm still researching.) But my case, and similar others, are not good evidence for those examples.
Oh, indeed! Sorry, I didn't mean to state that they proved his point or anything like that. I was just observing that they do seem to fit the criteria listed in the original comment Yvain was replying to.
Well... my point is that they do not, in fact, fit the criteria — specifically, criterion #2 — in the case of people who haven't considered these ideas as options.
Really?
Unless they're not considering them as options because they wouldn't work for them (e.g. not having the necessary resources/connections, being risk-averse, having a different utility function, etc.), but rather because they're unusual in some fashion...
I guess perhaps you weren't clear on why, exactly, you wanted them to have been ignored?
I'm not claiming that a majority of the people who don't do these options don't do them because they're aware of them but don't take them seriously. I'm claiming a majority (or at least many) of the people who possess enough knowledge about them to be able to figure out that they should do them, don't.
My source is mainly anecdotes from people I've talked to who know all the arguments for these but don't do them.
So, concretizing your claim, we get:
I find this hard to believe. Do you really have anecdotes supporting this? (And a lack of a comparable or greater quantity of anecdotes to the contrary?)
I am entirely unconvinced that taking modafinil is a good idea, so you would have to first demonstrate that.
I think your post would greatly benefit from the inclusion of some of those anecdotes you allude to. In other words, why do you believe this thing you believe? What has caused you to come to this conclusion? I would love to know!