= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam comments on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 - 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 (169)
Is there a implication of ranking with the way the levels are numbered? Are Level 5 people "more advanced" than lower levels and should one strive to move up levels?
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see post-modernists as the ultimate peak of human thinking.
Some charitable reading is required; the labels are oversimplifications.
I agree that most post-modernists are merely pretending to be at some high level of thinking, and the reason it works for them is that most of their colleagues are in exactly the same situation, so they pass the "peer review". But we can still use them as a pointer towards the real thing. What would be the useful mental skills that these people are pretending to have?
I remember reading somewhere about a similar model, but for the given question, on each level both "pro" and "con" positions were provided. That made it easier for the reader to focus on the difference between the levels.