= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MattG comments on Why Don't Rationalists Win? - LessWrong
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 (99)
Huh, lemme do it.
Schelling fence → bright-line rule
Semantic stopsign → thought-terminating cliché
Anti-inductiveness → reverse Tinkerbell effect
"0 and 1 are not probabilities" → Cromwell's rule
Tapping out → agreeing to disagree (which sometimes confuses LWers when they take the latter literally (see last paragraph of linked comment))
ETA (edited to add) → PS (post scriptum)
That's off the top of my head, but I think I've seen more.
Funging Against -> Considering the alternative
Akrasia -> Procrastination/Resistance
Belief in Belief -> Self-Deception
Ugh Field ->Aversion to (I had a better fit for this but I can't think of it now)