You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

atucker comments on On Leverage Research's plan for an optimal world - Less Wrong Discussion

25 Post author: Mitchell_Porter 10 January 2012 09:49AM

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

Comments (87)

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

Comment author: XiXiDu 10 January 2012 01:33:47PM 16 points [-]

Skeptic: The idea that a magic new theory of psychology will unlock human potential and create a new political majority of model citizens is a secular messianism with nothing to back it up.

Leverage Researcher: Have you done the necessary reading? Our ideas are based on years of disjunctive lines of reasoning (see blog post #343, 562 and 617 on why you are wrong).

Skeptic: But you have never studied psychology, why would I trust your reasoning on the topic?

Leverage Researcher: That is magical thinking about prestige. Prestige is not a good indicator of quality. We have written a bunch of blog posts about rationality and cognitive biases.

Skeptic: That's great. But do you have any data that indicates that your ideas might actually be true?

Leverage Researcher: No. You're entitled to arguments, but not (that particular) proof (blog post #898).

Skeptic: Okay. But I asked experts and they disagree with your arguments.

Leverage Researcher: You will soon learn that your smart friends and experts are not remotely close to the rationality standards of Leverage Research, and you will no longer think it anywhere near as plausible that their differing opinion is because they know some incredible secret knowledge you don't.

Skeptic: Ummm, okay. To refine my estimations regarding your theory of psychology, what do you anticipate to see if your ideas are right, is there any possibility to update on evidence?

Leverage Researcher: No, I don't know enough about psychology to be more specific about my expectations. We will will know once we try it, please support us with money to do so.

Skeptic: I am not convinced.

Leverage Researcher: We call that motivated skepticism (see blog post #1355).

Comment author: atucker 10 January 2012 05:31:06PM 1 point [-]

Skeptic: Ummm, okay. To refine my estimations regarding your theory of psychology, what do you anticipate to see if your ideas are right, is there any possibility to update on evidence?

Leverage Researcher: No, I don't know enough about psychology to be more specific about my expectations. We will will know once we try it, please support us with money to do so.

I don't think that this is actually true. While I don't know of Geoff's specific plans to test CT, I do know that he's interested in continuing to do so.

Comment author: XiXiDu 10 January 2012 07:34:24PM 1 point [-]

I don't think that this is actually true. While I don't know of Geoff's specific plans to test CT, I do know that he's interested in continuing to do so.

The author of the original post is skeptical about Leverage and I showed what would happen if Leverage was like lesswrong/SI. I am not criticizing Leverage.