= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Gleb_Tsipursky comments on "The Difference Between Medicine and Poison is Dosage" Shirts and Bags - 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 (50)
If that is an example from a series of workshops you ran, sure :-) That's the kind of case study story that CFAR uses, after all, except they target elites who make decisions within their own lives/companies that address the kind of sunken cost fallacy this exemplifies.
I don't think kitchen-table common-sense advice qualifies as spreading rationality and requires a full-blown non-profit to do :-/
Evidently, I also love hyphens X-)
You seem to have a much rosier outlook than I on the average person's ability to use common sense :)
I don't think that's true, I tend to consider "average people" idiots. But I also don't think that plain-vanilla advice along the lines of "don't normally carry a balance on your credit cards" requires a special non-profit or a lot of noise about rationality.
What do you think the best way to get these types of messages to sink in is?
Um, an advertising campaign professionally designed? :-/ If you want to manipulate people, ask those who do that for a living.
I'm rather sceptical about educating the stupid, though.
Who pays for the professional design? Who coordinates it?
Isn't that the purpose of having a non-profit around becoming more rational?
Whoever wants this to happen.
So far Gleb is personally splashing in the slime pools of HuffPo while demonstrating, to my eyes, a rather breathtaking lack of a clue about marketing...
Yes, it remains to be seen (for me) whether Gleb is the right one to lead this non-profit, but I read your original statement as saying that such a non-profit shouldn't exist.
Not quite. Judgments about what should or should not exist are usually presumptuous and silly -- if Jane Doe wants to set up and run a non-profit aiming, say, to impress the wonders of the high-fiber diet on the constipated populace, she can perfectly well do so and I don't see my opinion about that as relevant.
I wouldn't run one and I would expect such a non-profit to be not an efficient use of money, but that's just me.
Hindsight bias is a powerful thing :-)