The rise in wizard creation and deaths triggers the end of Jesus's stasis spell, and he analyzes the situation, gathers Harry, Hermione, and Draco together, and tells Harry to divide a third of his troops between Draco's and Hermione's armies, to make it fair.

Upvoted for this part.

Faint memory: didn't they have a statue in plate armor?

Yup. For that matter, Sir Cadogan is fairly unambiguously described as a mounted knight.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how this project is to be reliably carried out without knowing what wizards could have invented for themselves - or, indeed, how far back the separation between the two societies goes historically. I'll give you the train, certainly, but on the other hand:

They celebrate Christmas.

Early Christianity may have existed before Muggle and wizard societies separated. It may have had both wizard and Muggle worshippers (Rowling is silent on the matter of religion, but resurrection would be just as miraculous to wizards). For that matter, Jesus could have existed in the Potterverse, in which case odds of him being a wizard are extremely high.

IIRC, they use the Roman alphabet, or at least I don't remember British muggle students having to learn a different alphabet.

The Muggle and wizard communities are tightly bound enough to maintain the same language (they share the same geographical territory, and intermarriage is not uncommon). Assuming that, at some point in the past, wizardry emerged from a Muggle population, there's no reason why the two should not share the same linguistic evolution.

Their spells show an influence from Latin.

Which suggests the existence of Roman wizards, supporting the above point.

Hogwarts resembles a British public school.

Fair point. Although I struggle to come up with a mechanism by which nearly-modern Muggle teaching practices should come to be adopted by a school founded nearly a millennium earlier by wizarding purebloods, and maintained in a highly conservative fashion. If anything, one might speculate that British public schools are influenced by Hogwarts.

They speak English, even if words relating to technology and science are absent.

See above.

They use a train.

No contest. Ditto the printing press. I think our best bet may be to look at technologies which wizards would not have developed on their own (e.g. in that no other standard wizarding form of transport we know remotely resembles a train, or something which could evolve into a train). But that's a much more limited list.

The cues people have for noticing their rationalizations are things they notice before they're done thinking. They have not rationalized; they had a thought that could lead to rationalization or a feeling they associate with rationalizing. And then they stopped. But there was a large enough time between when they started arguing for a conclusion and when they decided to think about it that they noticed their rationalization. Having a reflex to think about a question fast enough compared to the reflex to rationalize can cause someone to not notice their arguments for some answer, then say they never rationalize, or just not rationalize.

I don't relate to anyone's examples of their own rationalizations or have use for the Litany of Tarski except for explaining myself to people who don't think deliberately. I would say I never rationalize if that is the alternative to giving an example of a time when I did because I haven't noticed such an example. But I also know that I am not in conscious control of most of my thought process, and that enumerating potential evidence for a hypothesis looks suspiciously like rationalization, so I would say I do rationalize if I can explain that instead of giving examples. Rationalization can occur subconsciously and not be recognized as a rationalization if it is not allowed to corrupt the whole line of thinking.

"I want to get my microexpressions analyzed so I can know what I'm thinking."

You are a superb straight man.

What I mean is, who will teach us how to learn how to teach how to learn?

after we learn how to teach how to learn

Yes. After that.

The pace I'm planning on sustaining is to do a class in 5 days (1 day for my work and 1 day off each week). What's impressive is all relative, I suppose, as I know plenty of people who could put my work to shame. I only hope to share in the process so people can learn from it.

A lot of people do four courses over 14 weeks, and that average of 24.5 days/course makes a speed reader's ~11 days/course without all the work and stress of assignments he understands before completing unimpressive. Sounds fun though.

PS: Also if you recall my previous comment on finding "friendly" A's is harder than finding friendly B's, it seems to me that if LWers respond as I think they will or even more enthusiastically than that, they will be signalling they consider themselves uniquely gifted in such (cognitive and other) resources. Preferring person A to B seems the better choice only if its rather unlikely that person A is significantly smarter than you or if you are exceptionally good at identifying sociopaths and/or people who share your interests. Choice A is a "rich" man's choice. Someone who can afford to use that status distribution. I hope you can also see that for A's that vastly differ in intelligence/resources/specialized abilities cooperating for common goals is tricky.

This seems to me relevant to what the values of someone likley to build a friendly AI seem to be. Has there been discussion or a article that explored these implications that I've missed so far?