Good_Burning_Plastic comments on Why Don't Rationalists Win? - Less Wrong

6 Post author: adamzerner 05 September 2015 12:57AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (99)

Comments (99)

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

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 11 September 2015 08:22:45AM 13 points [-]

Huh, lemme do it.

Schelling fence → bright-line rule

Semantic stopsign → thought-terminating cliché

Anti-inductiveness → reverse Tinkerbell effect

"0 and 1 are not probabilities" → Cromwell's rule

Tapping out → agreeing to disagree (which sometimes confuses LWers when they take the latter literally (see last paragraph of linked comment))

ETA (edited to add) → PS (post scriptum)

That's off the top of my head, but I think I've seen more.

Comment author: ScottL 11 September 2015 12:39:36PM *  5 points [-]

Thanks for this. Let me know if you have any others and I will add them to this wiki page I created: Less Wrong Canon on Rationality. Here are some more that I already had.

  • Fallacy of gray → Continuum fallacy
  • Motivated skepticism → disconfirmation bias
  • Marginally zero-sum game → arms race
Comment author: Jiro 11 September 2015 03:48:14PM 7 points [-]
Comment author: [deleted] 19 September 2015 05:03:45PM *  3 points [-]

Funging Against -> Considering the alternative

Akrasia -> Procrastination/Resistance

Belief in Belief -> Self-Deception

Ugh Field ->Aversion to (I had a better fit for this but I can't think of it now)

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 13 September 2015 02:49:23PM 1 point [-]

Instrumental/terminal = hypothetical/categorical

rationalist taboo = unpacking.

Comment author: helldalgo 02 December 2015 07:46:12AM 0 points [-]

Instrumental and terminal are pretty common terms. I've seen them in philosophy and business classes.

Comment author: Vaniver 11 September 2015 02:16:10PM 1 point [-]

Thanks for the list!

I am amused by this section of Anti-Inductiveness in this context, though:

Not that this is standard terminology - but perhaps "efficient market" doesn't convey quite the same warning as "anti-inductive". We would appear to need stronger warnings.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit