Comment author: ErinFlight 14 March 2015 05:24:15PM *  1 point [-]

This is not a specific problem caused by Less Wrong users, but I doubt I am the only one to experience it. I found Less Wrong as a young teenager searching for ways to improve herself and understand the world. This site was immensely helpful but it was also immensely isolating. I live in the bible belt, and I have always had few people to talk to. Also due to my age and inexperience there were few contributions I could make to the Less Wrong community. The intelligent level of discussion here contrasted sharply with my school and my friends and I began spending far too much time wanting connections I could not yet have. This contributed to a state of depression I was unable to think my way out of.

Sad as it made me, I actually had to ignore the Less Wrong community for a while so I could get back into equilibrium. I am older now, and on my way to college so I plan to get involved in this community again.

A more concrete example: I attempted to talk to my mother, a doctor, about humans and immortality. She took it as an insinuation that doctors and scientists weren't currently working hard enough and grew very angry.

Comment author: CellBioGuy 20 April 2014 06:22:08AM *  11 points [-]

Speaking from experience: don't kneejerk too hard. It's all too easy to react against everything at all implicitly associated with a religion or philosophy that you now reject the truth-claims of and distort parts of your personality or day to day life or emotions or symbolic thought that have nothing to do with what you have rejected.

Comment author: ErinFlight 23 April 2014 03:22:53AM 1 point [-]

Thank you. Last week was full of "Is this religious? Yes? No? I can't tell!." My brain has thankfully returned to normal function, and I will avoid intently analyzing every thought for religious connotations. The lack of guilt is nice, and I don't want to bring it back by stressing about the opposite.

Comment author: Shane_Patt 20 April 2014 08:00:16PM *  7 points [-]

Don't forget that reversed stupidity is not intelligence; a belief doesn't become wrong simply because it's widely held by Catholics.

Similarly, there's no need to be scared of responding positively to art or other ideas because they originated from a religious perspective; if atheism required us to do that, it would be almost as bleak a worldview as it's accused of being. Adeste Fideles doesn't stop being a beautiful song when you realize its symbols don't have referents. I think of the Christian mythology as one of my primary fantasy influences—like The Lord of the Rings, Discworld, The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant or Doctor Who—so, if I find myself reacting emotionally to a Christian meme, I don't have to worry that I'm having a conversion experience (or that God exists and is sneakily trying to win me over!): it's perfectly normal, and lawful, for works of fiction to have emotional impact.

Comment author: ErinFlight 23 April 2014 03:16:09AM 1 point [-]

The religious allusions seem even blatant now, but there is no way I'm getting rid of my copy of Chronicles of Narnia. I still feel the urge to look in the back of wardrobes.

Thank you. I had a religious song stuck in my head yesterday, but remembered reading you comment so was able to bypass the feeling of guilt.

Comment author: B_For_Bandana 20 April 2014 12:56:04AM *  21 points [-]
Comment author: ErinFlight 23 April 2014 03:12:01AM 1 point [-]

Unlike religion, here no one claims to be all-knowing or infallible. Which, from my point of view at least, is why LessWrong is so effective. Reading the arguments in the comments of the sequences was almost as important as reading the sequences themselves.

I wouldn't mind the paradise part or the living forever part though.

Comment author: [deleted] 21 April 2014 08:08:28PM 1 point [-]

You are allowed to pick the good pieces and ignore the bad pieces, instead of buying or rejecting the whole package.

This is known as cafeteria Catholicism. (I had only heard that used as an insult, but apparently there are people who self-identify as such.)

In response to comment by [deleted] on Open Thread April 16 - April 22, 2014
Comment author: ErinFlight 23 April 2014 03:06:41AM 2 points [-]

Cafeteria catholics fits most of my family, and for the past few years I could have also claimed the term. Though I've never met anyone who used it for themselves, it is generally considered a bad thing by most parts of the hierarchy. Cafeteria catholicism has recently been strongly condemned by the Catholic Church itself, part of the reason I started reconsidering religion in the first place.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 21 April 2014 12:02:35PM *  5 points [-]

What others already said: Don't try to reverse stupidity by avoiding everything conected to Catholicism. You are allowed to pick the good pieces and ignore the bad pieces, instead of buying or rejecting the whole package. Catholics also took some good parts from other traditions; which by the way means you don't even have to credit them for inventing the good pieces you decide to take.

If you talk with other religious people, they will probably try the following trick on you: Give you a huge book saying that it actually answers all your questions, and that you should at least read this one book and consider it seriously before you abandon religion completely. Of course if you read the whole book and it doesn't convince you, they will give you another huge book. And another. And another. The whole strategy is to surround you by religion memes (even more strongly than most religious people are), hoping that sooner or later something will "trigger" your religious feelings. And no matter how many books you read, if at some moment you refuse to read yet another book, you will be accused of leaving the religion only because of your ignorance and stubbornness, because this one specific book certainly did contain all answers to your questions and perfectly convincing counterarguments to your arguments, you just refused to even look at it. This game you cannot win: there is no "I have honestly considered all your arguments and found them unconvincing" exit node; the only options given to you are either to give up, or to do something that will allow your opponents to blame you of being willfully ignorant. (So you might as well do the "ignorant" thing now, and save yourself a lot of time.)

Don't try to convince other people, at least not during the first months after deconversion. First, you need to sort out things for yourself (you don't have a convincing success story yet). Second, by the law of reciprocation, if the other people were willing to listen to your explanations, this in turn gives them the moral right to give you a huge book of religious arguments and ask you to read it, which leads to the game described above.

Basicly, realize that you have a right to spend most of your time without thinking about Catholicism, either positively or negatively. That is what most atheists really do. If you were born on another planet, where religion wasn't invented, you wouldn't spend your time arguing against religion. Instead, you would just do what you want to do. So do it now.

Comment author: ErinFlight 23 April 2014 02:58:04AM 0 points [-]

Thank you for the advice. I've started by rereading the scientific explanations of the big bang, evolution, and basically most general scientific principles. Looking at it without constant justification going on in my mind is quite refreshing.

So far I've been able to avoid most of the arguments, though I was surprised by how genuinely sad some people were. I'm going to keep quiet about religion for a while, and figure out what other pieces of my worldview I need to take a rational, honest look at.

Comment author: ErinFlight 19 April 2014 11:08:58PM 15 points [-]

Last week, after a lot of thought and help from LessWrong, I finally stopped believing in god and dropped my last remnants of Catholicism. It is turned out to be a huge relief, though coping with some of the consequences and realizations that come with atheism has been a little difficult.

Do any of you have any tips you noticed about yourself or others after just leaving religion? I've noticed a few small habits I need to get rid of, but I am worried I'm missing larger, more important ones.

Are there any particular posts I should skip ahead and read? I am currently at the beginning of reductionism. Are their any beliefs you've noticed ex-catholics holding that they don't realize are obviously part of their religion? I do not have any one immediately around me I can ask, so I am very grateful for any input. Thank you!

Comment author: Adele_L 31 March 2014 01:54:25AM *  4 points [-]

Hi Erin, I'm Adele! It's good to see young rationalists here. I think you might really like Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. Daniel Kahneman is a well-known psychologist, and winner of the 2002 Nobel prize in Economics. In this book, he goes through different thinking processes that humans often use, and how they are often wrong. It is not very technical, and is a pretty easy read IMO. It might also help with some of the cognitive science stuff in the sequences.

It's okay to not understand Bayes' theorem for now, knowing the math doesn't really make you that much better at being rational - there are easier things to do with larger gains. If you want to get the programming references, it might be worth learning to program. There are some online courses which make it relatively easy to get started. It's also a good skill to have for when you are looking for employment.

One thing that has helped me a lot in being more rational is having friends who can point out when I am being irrational. Another good place to look at (and go if you can) is CFAR, whose point is basically to help you get better at being rational.

Comment author: ErinFlight 01 April 2014 03:31:52AM 1 point [-]

Thank you for the resources! Kahneman's book looks very interesting, and luckily my library has it. I'll check it out as soon as possible. I am planning on taking a Java Programming class next year. Does Java have the same set up/structure/foundation as the languages that are referenced on here? What would you say is the programming language that is most relevant to rationality (even if it isn't a good beginning language)?

Comment author: shminux 31 March 2014 02:48:55AM *  3 points [-]

Welcome, Erin! As Adele said, even if math is not your passion, you can still learn a lot about your own thinking from what Eliezer and others wrote. For a look back by one notable LWer, see http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/13/five-years-and-one-week-of-less-wrong/ . Be sure to check out Scott's other blog entries, they are almost universally eloquently written, well-researched, charitable, insightful and thought-provoking.

Comment author: ErinFlight 01 April 2014 03:25:52AM 0 points [-]

Thank you for the link. I'm very pleased to find another source of such interesting ideas. I anticipate the day when I too will read the sequences and be able to say "everything in them seems so obvious."

Comment author: satt 31 March 2014 11:29:56PM 2 points [-]

I'll throw in a couple more explanations as well. (It's hard to know in advance which one might make the idea click neatly into place!)

Comment author: ErinFlight 01 April 2014 03:13:00AM 3 points [-]

Thank you both! Just starting to go through those explanations, Bayes Theorem is making a lot more sense, and I'm also starting to see why everyone is excited about it.

View more: Next