(whoops can't figure out > quotes quite yet, so quotation marks will have to do.)
"Are you already familiar with 80,000 Hours and GiveWell?"
I had seen links to them, but hadn't gotten around to reading about them. I'll keep them in mind. Thanks.
"I do think that it is possible to actively work towards becoming a better conversationalist. "
Very true. When I learned about brain plasticity I was truly shocked at how much rewiring is possible. Did you know that you can lose either side of your brain as an infant and still live mostly normally? We can definitely improve ourselves significantly. The question there is which things when trained will provide the most utility.
"Your results may vary, but I have found that it is hard to get people to care about things which they do not already care about, unless they already have a lot in common with you, intellectually and philosophically."
I was planning on putting these in the engineering buildings mostly. I would argue that it is much easier to convince engineering types at least first to explore rationality, and then as they explore the site then they would have to deal with the money issues themselves.
"I think that speaking with friends who might enjoy LessWrong might be a better idea than spreading fliers across your campus."
I will agree that conversation is almost certainly the most effective route to convince a particular person, but many people aren't even aware than LW exists, so they might not even need convincing to explore. By putting it out there I catch people I don't even know, or couldn't possibly meet. This method has the disadvantage that I can't personally talk to them about it (maybe I could put my username on the flyer),
"I might only feel that way about flier-posting because flier-posting is far too bold of a thing for anypony named Fluttershy to do"
Silly pony.
"it does seem to me that messages spread by such means are cheapened by being circulated in such a manner."
To a certain degree yes, but not if the messages direct them to better manners of message circulation. The message I was thinking of was something along the lines of "Less Wrong: improve your critical thinking skills! Think smarter, not harder. Discuss ideas, philosophy, and rationality" which would hopefully be more as an invitation to a conversation with self-improvement than an introduction into a cult that wants their money. Maybe rather than a flyer per-say it could be a tiny little square piece of paper with sparse details inviting curiosity.
"Also, for what it is worth, I think that HPMoR appeals to a much larger set of people than the LessWrong sequences do, though people who identify closely enough with the "LessWrong culture" might benefit the most from being directly introduced to LessWrong."
I'm not really sure how much that is the case. HPMoR is like 500k words long, and is fanfiction. Readers of fanfiction don't care, but those that don't read it would be turned off. 500k words is nearly two full days days of straight reading for even me. I wouldn't call it particularly accessible either (haven't read it yet though. I've sworn off fanfiction for the moment after The Month of Fanfiction).
LW I would argue is significantly better, but has issues in that it is jargon filled and has kinda weird ideas. It has a tvtropes like effect on me at least. I read a thing which links to a dozen more things so I never leave. As I am focusing on the engineering types I should expect similar results. Probably should actually tell people about it and see what happens. You are right that a specific introduction is almost certainly more effective than a piece of paper floating around.
"Good luck in your endeavors!"
Thanks, I appreciate it.
I want to help the world as much as possible: lets define that as reduction of suffering1 of the human race.
I am an engineering student. It would be very simple to spend the rest of my life working on engineering problems, thereby making humanity more effective, and so reducing suffering: Pretty acceptable in terms of benefit to the world, and also given my skill set it makes sense. The issue here is that it may be a local maximum.
Now, what if instead of directly solving problems I focus my efforts on other people? Directing others down a more rational path. This may include things like telling people about Less Wrong, specifically addressing their direction in life, or providing information about effective charities instead of ineffective ones. This seems like a massively more efficient solution space, even if my social skills are weak. Compared to the effectiveness of a single engineer, the life paths of hundreds of people with improved rationality would be enormous.
Here I make the assumption that more rational thought reduces suffering. I would argue this to be the case because a less rational thinker is going to act in more conflicting, arbitrary, and harmful ways than otherwise. Clearer thinking then means better judgements, and we also say that on average people's actions improve society as evidenced by society progressing to this point.
Still, directing others is not particularly efficient for me considering my skill set. This task should be delegated to another with a skill set more suited: a people person. This would then allow me to get back to my own efficient problems. But here is the question: How many "people people" is it efficient to train? Isn't my time still better spent as an ineffective people person even above my direct problem solving even at that point? If so, shouldn't we all be focusing on expanding our numbers?
By doing so will we increase the quality of our discussions by bringing in many new ideas and faces, or will more people hinder quality? Should we instead simply delve deeper into the depths of rationality growing only as people discover the site organically? What is the ideal community growth rate? (quality versus quantity? If Less Wrong expands too quickly is that an issue?)
We could also produce some kind of rationality book or other set of materials if we intended to improve rationality without inherently expanding the community by linking them. (Anyone super interested would go looking for more, and we'd definitely want them.)
I may be overestimating how much other people's lives can be influenced, but it seems a high probability that after even a year of dedicated... irrationality sniping?... on even a bimonthly basis (every other Saturday lets say) would have a profound effect on at least one other individual. Especially given the internet's connective ability it seems that the ability to improve the cognitions of other people is cheap and high impact compared to direct problem solving.
If I am not solving those engineering problems will someone else be? The question then becomes how much I value the reduction of the world's suffering versus my other values rather than the actual effectiveness of irrationality sniping versus direct problem solving.
Conclusion: To reduce world suffering I should reduce the irrationality of others, then convince those persons to do the same.
Should there be a lesson plan of sorts for aspiring rationalists? There are the sequences, and people interested enough will find their own way around the site, but I am wondering if there is some more directed thought process we want people to go through, or if perhaps randomly encountering ideas might actually be better, especially if we are trying to expand rationality in all directions.
Regardless of the answers to these questions I intend to print out flyers and scatter them across my college campus. Is there already a resource like that I can just print off? I figure even if I drop off the face of the earth I'll have done some good that way.
1. Without uh, killing everyone or tiling smiley faces.
ps. Sorry if this comes off as rambling. No idea what I am doing. Never stopped me before.