Jiro comments on Is Scott Alexander bad at math? - LessWrong

31 Post author: JonahSinick 04 May 2015 05:11AM

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

Comments (219)

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

Comment author: Jiro 06 May 2015 03:23:18PM 2 points [-]

So I've been very puzzled as to why when I post to LW, it's not uncommon for people to respond in confrontational / standoffish ways, implicitly or explicitly expressing skepticism as to the value of what I have to offer.

Because that's what it means for a discussion to be two way. People criticize you. That's how it works.

It's not that I'm never skeptical of the value of an author's writing: there are just things that I'd rather be doing than talking about it!

I doubt it, because that would imply that even if you're trying to teach someone, you never try to dispel any misconceptions, correct errors, etc. You probably don't think of those as "being skeptical of the value of an author's writing", but in fact, that's what it is. Well, in a two way discussion, this is going to be happening in both directions, and just like you do it to other people, other people will do it to you.

Comment author: JonahSinick 06 May 2015 03:46:10PM *  3 points [-]

Because that's what it means for a discussion to be two way. People criticize you. That's how it works.

Has this been your experience in real life interactions? LW is virtually the only context in which I've seen this dynamic as a community norm. :-)

I doubt it, because that would imply that even if you're trying to teach someone, you never try to dispel any misconceptions, correct errors, etc. You probably don't think of those as "being skeptical of the value of an author's writing", but in fact, that's what it is.

Some reasons why I might engage somebody:

  1. I have a lot to learn from the person.
  2. The person is high potential enough so that if I communicate relevant information him or her, that'll enable him or her to use it to powerful effect.
  3. The person is in a position of influence such that it's actually really important that misconceptions get corrected, and the person seems open-minded enough so that the chance of influencing the person's thinking is reasonable.
  4. I find the person pleasant to be around.

All of these things are signals of respect. What I'm puzzled by is the fact that some LWers who engage with me don't seem to respect me in the way that I respect them (as shown by my taking time to communicate with them when the time could be spent in other ways!). I feel like "If you don't respect me, why are you talking to me at all? Why don't you instead spend time talking with people who you do respect?"

Can you help me understand what's going on here?

Comment author: Jiro 06 May 2015 04:08:09PM 2 points [-]

What I'm puzzled by is the fact that some LWers who engage with me don't seem to respect me in the way that I respect them (as shown by my taking time to communicate with them when the time could be spent in other ways!).

The ultimate problem is that you seem to have a double standard, and this is an example of it. If you taking time to communicate with them counts as a sign of you respecting them, then them taking the time to communicate with you should count as a sign of them respecting you. Just like the double standard where someone who criticizes you is "skeptical of the value of an author's writing" but when you do the same thing to other people, you're just correcting misconceptions and influencing the person's thinking. You're nobody special here, just like everyone else is nobody special. [1]

[1] There are some people, like Eliezer, who sometimes get treated as special. I don't agree at all with this.

Comment author: JonahSinick 06 May 2015 04:16:38PM 3 points [-]

The ultimate problem is that you seem to have a double standard, and this is an example of it. If you taking time to communicate with them counts as a sign of you respecting them, then them taking the time to communicate with you should count as a sign of them respecting you.

Your comments have been giving me the sense that you don't respect me – have I been misreading you?

Comment author: dxu 06 May 2015 05:22:38PM *  3 points [-]

The thing is, most people on LW don't disagree for any specific reason like respect or wanting to correct misconceptions or whatever. Disagreement just happens to be the status quo here. I haven't worked out why people here like to disagree so much, even when there seems to be no benefit from doing so--but then again, humans aren't perfectly instrumentally rational, and perhaps LWers are less instrumentally rational than most. (We certainly do seem to have more people suffering from akrasia around here than most places, after all.) It's also possible that Lumifer and Vaniver are right, and that LW users are a conceited, contentious bunch that like to disagree to signal intelligence and/or gain karma. I know I've fallen victim to the urge to nitpick before, and so have many others here, including even prominent users like shminux. (Jiro, too, from my previous experience talking with him/her.) It's just nitpicking. Respect, for better or for worse, doesn't even really enter the equation.

For the record, however, I do respect your mathematical ability, and while I'm less confident about your metacognitive abilities, I think that if you've spent as much time pondering this subject as you claim--certainly a lot more time than most people around here have, probably--you have a reasonably good grasp on what you're talking about. Just don't expect most LWers to feel the same way.

Comment author: Jiro 06 May 2015 05:18:47PM 1 point [-]

I think you are too quick to take disagreement personally. Interpreting disagreement as lack of respect is an example of this.

Comment author: dxu 06 May 2015 05:33:43PM 2 points [-]

I think it's more issues like tone, personally. (Particularly egregious are examples of "you are" statements, instead of "I feel" statements, which I've noticed many LWers seem really prone to making. It's a lot less pretentious-sounding when you prefix your statements with an "I feel" or "I think" or "in my opnion".)

Comment author: JonahSinick 06 May 2015 05:32:31PM 2 points [-]

You didn't answer my question: do you respect me? :-) You're not giving any positive feedback whatsoever. I don't care what you think of me, but it's reasonable for me to assume that you don't have any positive feelings toward me if you're not saying anything positive.

Comment author: Jiro 06 May 2015 05:35:53PM 2 points [-]

I respect you by my standards, but apparently not by your standards.

Comment author: itaibn0 07 May 2015 01:35:18AM 1 point [-]

Based on JonahSinick's prior comments, his motivation for asking this question is pretty clear. You have already critiqued the thought process that made him think this question is necessary, to attack it again is almost double-counting. I think if you had answered the question directly the discussion would have a better chance of bootstrapping out of mutual unintelligibility. Then again, I mostly lurk and only rarely participate in internet debates so I don't feel I really understand how any given discussion strategy would actually play out. Also, I cheated, since Jonah already expressed a desire for a direct answer.