= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam comments on Open Thread, May 25 - May 31, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (301)
I'm currently twenty-two years old. Over the last two weeks, I've discussed with a couple friends that among the "millenial" generation, i.e., people currently under the age of thirty-five, people profess having goals for some kind of romantic relationships, but they don't act in a way which will let them achieve those goals. Whether they:
it seems the proportion of young people who are and stay single is greater than I would expect. I don't just mean how the fastest-growing household configuration since the 1980s (in the United States) has been single adults. I mean how most of my friends profess a preference for having some romantic relationship in their life, yet most of my single friends stay single, and don't appear to be dating much or doing something else to correct this. Maybe popular culture exerts a normative social influence which favors people in relationships over single people, and so young single people feel pressured to signal a preference for being in a relationship. However, I can't determine who is just professing fake preferences to signal. It still seems single people aren't seeking or successfully finding relationships at a rate which corresponds well to genuine preferences for a relationship. Why aren't single people trying harder to find relationships?
One answer could be "dating and romance are hard, especially for young people". If that's vaguely true, it doesn't satisfy my curiosity. I think it has in large part to do with the extended adolesence of people born after, e.g., 1980. More committed relationships, higher frequency of dating, and/or marriage seem to people around my age something we're supposed to do more when we're "real adults". That happens some time after you get a "real job". Or after you complete a degree. Or after the age of twenty-five. Something like that.
It also seems dependent upon changes in dating culture in North America. I'm aware there are more hookups and one-night stands among young adults of the current generation than there was for prior generations. In terms of who one settles down with, or marries, people get married at greater ages. I don't know if it's because we young adults are pickier with whom we choose for long-term relationships, or what. This is where I don't know exactly what's going on, so I could use your help. If you (think you) can explain what's going on, please share.
Anyway, what I've concluded so far is that, as someone who doesn't date very much, a sensible strategy would be to date more often and more early to satisfy relationship goals. That is, while many of my generation have similar goals and expectations for dating, relationships and/or marriage compared to previous generations, the styles and culture of such in North America are very different. If young adults wait until their mid-thirties before they start fulfilling long-term relationship goals, it might take longer than they expect, and by that point seeking relationships may cut into time developing other valuable aspects of one's life, such as career. Dating earlier and more frequently allows one to discover what one initially wants in a partner, how to navigate the dating pool and social scenes comfortably, adapt to potential setbacks and heartbreak, and mature.
Now, there are lots of young adults in graduate school, or going through a period of time when prioritizing a romantic relationship wouldn't allow the time and attention to fulfill more immediately important goals. During the period(s) of life when you have downtime, if busy young adults aren't satisfied with being single, I think it makes sense for us to try dating and relationships more, because there may not be as much time and opportunity as we hope later in life. What do you think of this model/strategy?
Tangentially, how much is it a problem of "dating", and how much a problem of "dating with sane people", when the pool of sane people is already small?
When I was younger, I wanted to have a romantic relationship with a person whom I would perceive as intellectually equal (plus or minus the LessWrong level). Since I barely knew such people... not much luck.
If I could send a message in time back to myself, it would be: "It will take decades until you find someone you can have meaningful conversation with. Meanwhile, relax, and try to fuck any nice body, but don't get attached. Otherwise you will later regret the wasted time." The only problem is, my younger self would be horrified to hear such advice.
I feel the same way on "dating with sane people". I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on this.
Seems to me that in a relationship people spend much more time talking than having sex. Thus, even if the sex is great, if talking is painful, the relationship as a whole sucks.
And that's just idle talk... imagine having to solve real problems, or even owning property together, or having children. All the stupid stuff you read about online, happening at your own home.
Before LW, I didn't know any "sane" community. I did know a few "sane" individuals. But they didn't have the explicit concept of "sanity"; I was not able to ask them "Where can I find more people like you?" in a way that would make them understand what exactly I wanted. For example, if they had a hobby, they would recommend me other people having the same hobby, but those other people wouldn't be "sane". In other words, there wasn't a place to meet new "sane" people.
If I could be 20 years old again now, my step 1 for a serious relation would be "go to all possible LW meetups", and the step 2 would probably be starting my own rationalist blog, in hope of attracting attention of someone who doesn't go to LW meetups (yet). In reality, I already do have a girlfriend, and she helps me organize local LW meetups. I met her completely randomly, and it took me a few decades to have such lucky random event. I obviously can't recommend that as a strategy.
Actually, until a few years ago I didn't even have a hope of ever dating a sane person. Probably not even the concept of sanity; only a vague idea of "someone like me". But that only creates an infinite recursion: where should I go to meet "people like me", if the problem in the first place is that I don't know where to go? Where is my Schelling point? Even today, I cannot give a better answer than "a LW community". (But I was not strong enough to create one. Which is one of the reasons I deeply admire Eliezer.)
Cool, thank you! I can really relate to what you describe, especially the "not knowing any sane people" part.
What are your thoughts on relationships in general? Let me explain - in brief, I agree with the idea that it's "a form of socially acceptable insanity" (sort of). To obsess and commit to one thing so much seems crazy to me. But not really; it makes people happy and you don't (always) have to sacrifice too much. So the cost-benefit does seem worth it.
Obsession is nature's way of making cooperation more resistant to random disruptive events.
I think an important skill in relationships is to be able to see a long-term perspective even when you are in a bad moment. Don't ruin a mostly great relationship, just because today is the exceptional day that sucks. It can be easy to start a downward spiral. Forgiving is a way to play "tit for tat" in a noisy environment. The simplest hack to make people forgive is to make them blind towards the mistakes. (Which again comes with its own problems, because evolution is so short-sighted. Some people are too blind; some people forgive too much.)
Costly signalling of cooperation is important in situations where there is so much at stake, such as raising children. I am rather conservative about relationships because... well, if I simplify it a lot, conservatism at its core is all about costly signalling.
Sorry, I'm rambling, because of lack of sleep. So I'll stop now.
That's very interesting, I never thought of it like that before.
No need to apologize - If you want to keep rambling, I'll be listening.