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.

Lumifer comments on Emotional tools for the beginner rationalist - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gleb_Tsipursky 09 October 2015 05:01AM

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

Comments (44)

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

Comment author: Viliam 09 October 2015 03:12:43PM *  1 point [-]

I'm not sure that lack of noticing effects like this is an indication that they aren't there.

I'm aware of the possibility, and I have also mentioned it in the facebook debate. Or, more likely, I have problems finding the right words to express what I want to say:

I had situations where I didn't know something, when I forgot things, when I believed an information that was wrong, etc. Lots of them. Still doing it. Most likely will always do.

In the past (before finding LW) I have repeatedly experimented with belief in belief (because I wanted the placebo effects or social approval), but those experiments were always half-assed and very short-termed; they felt incompatible with my personality. I couldn't stop being aware that I am merely acting.

I also fail a lot at instrumental rationality. I am aware of what I should do... and I somehow just don't do it.

But I don't remember having a situation where I enjoyed being wrong or didn't care about being wrong, like described here and here. That just feels completely strange to me. I have problem empathising with people who, upon learning that they were wrong, just don't give a fuck.

Therefore -- that's why I mentioned it in the debate -- I have no clue about what to tell them to help them change their ways. I have never been there (as far as I know), and I have no idea what it feels like to be there. So I have no model that would help me test which ideas might be attractive enough to draw a person out of there.

EDIT: I feel like I should add so many disclaimers here. I am happy that at least Gleb understands what I was trying to say.

Of course there are reasons when you want to keep a map despite knowing it is not correct. When it is a useful simplification, like Newtonian physics. I am talking about people whose maps are not even approximately correct, but they still keep them because... I am only guessing here... they still provide emotional comfort.

I don't feel comfortable with having an obviously wrong map, even if it would be socially approved. I have problem belonging to most groups, because sooner or later there is a shared group map you have to accept. For example, having a political opinion (in the sense of: completely buying a standardized map) feels like insanity; on the same level as belonging to a cult. (I am strongly sympathetic to the libertarian ethics of not initiating force. That doesn't convince me that the best way to organize a society is to dismantle all states and let the warlords fight it out in the "free market".)

There may also be unlucky situations where I am wrong, other people are right, but they lack the right words to convince me (sometimes because they themselves believe the right thing for the wrong reasons, e.g. because it is a standard belief in their social group). But I don't have an epistemic strategy for avoiding such situations without making things worse on average; or course believing everything wouldn't be an improvement.

Etc.

Comment author: Lumifer 09 October 2015 03:48:46PM *  0 points [-]

I am talking about people whose maps are not even approximately correct, but they still keep them because... I am only guessing here... they still provide emotional comfort.

Two points. First, a very important word here is "matters". A lot of maps don't matter. If I believe that there are adepts meditating in secret caves in Tibet and they have direct access to the the Akashic records and so can see into the future and into the past -- so what? Does that affect my life in any way? (note, by the way, the difference between "could matter" and "does matter").

Second, an incorrect map is also known as "fiction". That makes for an interesting connection to the parallel thread about the use{full|less}ness of fiction.

Comment author: Viliam 09 October 2015 07:33:54PM *  0 points [-]

I enjoy fiction. Also, when I talk e.g. with religious people, I imagine that we are all talking about some imaginary world; then it doesn't bother me that their arguments do not apply to our world. I can discuss Bible the same way I can discuss Tolkien, and sometimes it's fun. Only when people remind me that they actually believe the elves are real, it gets weird.

Your first example... that's also in the weird territory. I could enjoy it as a fiction. I don't see any other use for it. -- Is it just an aesthetic difference?