Vaniver comments on Open thread, June 20 - June 26, 2016 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Elo 21 June 2016 02:45AM

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

Comments (89)

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

Comment author: Evan_Gaensbauer 24 June 2016 10:12:59AM 2 points [-]

I've wondered this too. In particular, for several years, at least among people I know, people have constantly questioned the level of rationality in our community, particularly our 'instrumental rationality'. This is summed up by the question: "if you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" That is, if rationalists are so rational, why aren't they leveraging their high IQs and their supposed rationality skills to perform in the top percentages and all sorts of metrics of coveted success? Even by self-reports, such as the LW survey(s). However, I've thought of a contrapositive question: "if you're stupid, why aren't you poor?" I.e., while rationalists might not all be peak-happiness millionaires or whatever, we might also ask the question about what the rates of (socially perceived) failure are, and how they compare to other cohorts, communities, reference classes, etc.

You're the first person I've seen to pose this question. There might have been others, though.

Comment author: Vaniver 24 June 2016 06:57:10PM 5 points [-]

This is summed up by the question: "if you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"

For many LWers, the answer is "I'm young," but I think there are also a lot of people where the answer is "I am rich."

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 25 June 2016 03:37:18PM *  3 points [-]

Also worth noting: LWers should be extracting more utility from their money than non-LWers.