Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: Dr_Manhattan 06 August 2016 08:48:14PM 2 points [-]

This is probably a good idea. My take is that most of resistance I'm culturally aware of would come from people concerned about an irreversible change to the ecosystem, whether or not this concern is warranted. Potentially worth investigating/getting some experts on your side/proposing a contained preservation of a mosquito population (the way we preserve rare diseases)

Comment author: MixedNuts 07 August 2016 06:15:37AM 2 points [-]

Well yes, I am very concerned, because you're talking about convincing people that it won't collapse ecosystems, and not about figuring out whether it'll actually collapse ecosystems in the real world that doesn't care how persuasive you sound.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 November 2015 12:52:00PM *  0 points [-]

I reckon the French Foreign Legion offers a great prosocial container for psychopaths. Considering the only psychological entry requirements are an IQ test (irrelevant for psychopaths) and a personality test (very relevant, but easily gamed), I reckon they could get in asssuming they meet the psychopathy indifferent characteristics.

Considering that psychopaths may indeed be prosocial or ethically motivated. They might not be very happy with regular life, so socially legitimacy in the Legion would be a superb opportunity for them to advance prosocial causes, relative to say criminal violence.

No one much joins the Lions of Rojava cause they have shit recruiting, propoganda and social media management.

I reckon people fight for the sake of fighting, not for ideology

Ahmed, who fled his town near Raqqa in June, said some of the Arab fighters would try to mix with the local population, but the Europeans and other non-Arabs never did. He said that although the Islamic State militants claimed they were there to create a better life for Muslims, they seemed mainly focused on battles with other rebel groups and government forces.

"They were always very aggressive, and they seemed angry," he said. "They are there to fight, not to govern."

they're frequently described as ''oversubscribed'' and

The FFL currently has 7,700 troops. By way of comparison the California National Guard has 18,000 troops. The FFL only takes 1 of 40 qualified applicants according to their own statistics. And the large majority of those they take have previous military experience in another country.

Perhaps that explaisn the popularity of foreign fighting with ISIS

I suppose the main reason it would be unethical to recommend this line of work even to psychopaths is the rate of injuries like back pain and such, even for those who don't go to combat (training).

In response to comment by [deleted] on Notes on Psychopathy
Comment author: MixedNuts 07 November 2015 03:15:34PM 0 points [-]

Considering that psychopaths may indeed be prosocial or ethically motivated.

Does that happen? I mean, there are psychopaths who decide to ignore the tendency and act morally, but would shooting some dudes still be fun then?

Comment author: MixedNuts 25 February 2015 01:05:32PM *  0 points [-]

User:SuikaSuika can't comment for some reason, but wishes to register interest.

Meetup : Singapore Meetup Group

1 MixedNuts 21 February 2015 12:48PM

Discussion article for the meetup : Singapore Meetup Group

WHEN: 01 March 2015 02:00:00PM (+0100)

WHERE: East Coast Park, next to the beach, at The Amber Beacon Tower, Singapore

There will be a meetup on March 1.

Time: 2pm until ???

Location: East Coast Park, next to the beach, at The Amber Beacon Tower* (Google Street View, more diagrammatic map) The tower is near Parkland Green, where people could get food before or after.

Activity: Loose socializing and discussion. If you have something you know you'd like to talk about, feel to post a blurb or relevant link here.

The meetup organiser is particularly interested to talk to people about how to decide when to gather more information versus act on the information one already has (which may be known to be inaccurate). This boils down to how to calculate an expected value of information gathering. Of course, by March 1 he might be onto something else.

*The Amber Beacon Tower is also known as the Yellow Tower, and is purportedly haunted by a murder victim.

Note: I can't convince the automatic Google Maps thing (here underneath) to show the right place (coordinates are 1.298176,103.905926), if you know what I should put into the "Location" field to make it do that, please tell me.

Discussion article for the meetup : Singapore Meetup Group

Comment author: MixedNuts 11 July 2014 05:34:55AM 0 points [-]

Tuxedage, if you see this, please contact me.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 25 February 2014 12:26:07PM *  4 points [-]

Something feels to me really wrong about that last sentence. Not that it hypothetically couldn't be technically true, but it's certainly not a way I would recommend to anyone. Associating love and closeness with fear and guilt... that's how I model a strongly religious person or a victim in an abusive relationship... and it's a state of mind I definitely do not endorse. (I try keeping an open mind that there may be some specific situation where it isn't as bad as it seems to me, but I give it a low probability.) For me, feeling safe is an opposite of fear, so an idea of a "crushing fear and guilt" as a way towards love makes as much sense as stabbing oneself with a knife as a way to achieve health (yes, there may be a very specific situation where...).

Considering this and your previous comments, I update towards belief that you simply don't have an experience with the emotion, and the verbal explanations just don't click because there is nothing to connect the words with. (Alternatively, you may have the experience with the emotion in some other context, but something in your mind prevents you from even imagining it in the context of a sexual relation.) Which sounds like a horrible thing, so I'd recommend trying... uhm... a) speaking about this topic with a psychologist; b) finding a couple with a good long-term relationship and either ask them or just spend a lot of time around them to learn by copying; c) speaking about this with someone you trust, e.g. on the next LW meetup, but personally, not online, because an online debate does not transfer emotions well.

(I apologize if this offended you, of course there is a chance that I am completely wrong, but the value of information is possibly very big here.)

Comment author: MixedNuts 26 February 2014 08:42:52PM 0 points [-]

Wait, you mean actually feel safe, as in you can relax just as much as when you're alone with a good book, not just be aware that the person is allied to you? How does that jive with "using your conscious decision to behave nicely to the other person even if at the moment you don't feel emotionally compelled to"?

I was abused as a child. You seem to be very distressed about this, so let me make it clear that my life is pretty good and I don't have any awful traumas or anything. But all sources of advice about how to move on and go on about one's life insist on this: abuse screws up attachment. If I ever (ever, not "before I've healed enough") drop my CONSTANT VIGILANCE!, I will hurt people who love me for the power trip (this is confirmed by experience), and I will be abused again by someone who notices I'm an easy victim (this isn't; Shiny Boyfriend is astoundingly ethical).

There's probably a better way to keep those bad tendencies in check than through fear and guilt, which is why I brought it up. But your version of love seems incompatible with having bad tendencies in the first place.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 24 February 2014 08:23:38AM *  3 points [-]

What I described is what works for me, so I'm not going to generalize.

I've had close trusted friends I had sexual desire for (whether I acted on it or not) without wanting to date them.

Happens to me, too. Yes, there is some important component missing that I haven't described. (Trying to think about specific examples: Sometimes the sexual attraction was there but not high enough; I would rather have sex with the person than not, but I believed I could do much better. In a polygamous society they would probably be a great secondary partner. Sometimes the life goals were so incompatible, I couldn't imagine living together; or there was a great understanding in some issues, but also a vast lack of understanding in others.)

But still, this is almost a subset of what I tried to describe. Sometimes I even thought that if it would be possible to split people into components and arrange them differently, I already had enough material to build a perfect partner for me.

What is it like when the obsession fades?

You start noticing that other things exist, too. You are able to enjoy a good book, even if the person is in the same room. You realize there are things you liked to do before you met this person, then you completely forgot about those things, and now you miss them.

If you don't understand what is happening, and especially if the other person is still in the obsession phase, you may feel guilty for not loving them enough, or gradually become angry that they are "suffocating" you, because they want to take all your attention, but you now also want to focus on your hobbies. (An irrational person with lack of introspection may even blame the other person that they made them abandon their hobbies; but it's more likely that during the obsession phase they gave up their hobbies voluntarily, and now they are just editing the past to fit into a better narrative.) The other person probably feels ignored, not loved, and may suspect you found someone else instead of them.

If the other person is already out of the obsession phase, and you get out later, it simply means you can both enjoy your hobbies again. Though, if you are not familiar with the process (and your model of love is based on Hollywood movies), you may have doubts about whether everything is okay, even if technically there is no problem at the moment.

I'm not sure many people agree that Mature Adult Love takes less than six months to develop!

It could depend on how much "practice" from the previous relationships you have. Or maybe it's faster if you already knew each other before you fell in love. Or maybe that's the gap that you have to overcome using your conscious decision to behave nicely to the other person even if at the moment you don't feel emotionally compelled to.

The obsession phase also depends on how much opportunity you have to be together. Generally, obstacles (that seem surmountable) make the obsession last longer. There may also be individual differences.

many people think of love as intense friendship plus sex, while many others have a completely distinct romance drive.

This very likely could be a typical mind fallacy, but I believe the "distinct romance drive" is just rationalizing the obsession (often using a supernatural explanation).

Again, this is a model that works for me, and I am not sure how much it applies to other people. I try to be helpful, because years ago I didn't understand this model, and I probably suffered pointlessly because of it. But I don't insist that everyone is the same as me.

Comment author: MixedNuts 24 February 2014 08:26:45PM 0 points [-]

Thanks! That doesn't match my experience at all, so it's nice to learn about.

maybe that's the gap that you have to overcome using your conscious decision to behave nicely to the other person even if at the moment you don't feel emotionally compelled to

Crushing fear of being abusive, and guilt about having hurt them in the past, works really well for this.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 23 February 2014 11:43:00AM *  12 points [-]

It is a real thing. You can find more detailed explanation on Married Man Sex Life blog, but essentially there are three things people can mean when talking about "love", and each of them is driven by a different set of chemicals.

a) obsession
b) closeness
c) sexual desire

The obsessive love is A + C, or sometimes just A. The mature love is B + C, with a smaller intensity of A returning shortly once in a while, usually when you break your stereotype in a good way, e.g. go together on an exotic vacation, or go dancing.

You probably already have the experience of B without C. It's what you feel towards good friends (the ones you feel safe with), family members, or perhaps your pet. And what you will later feel towards your children. The feeling increases if you touch someone in a non-sexual way (e.g. hug, or dance with), or if you look deeply in their eyes (assuming you already feel safe with them).

Now imagine this, in a high intensity (but only when you think about the given person, usually when you are with them, not obsessively all the time), with the sexual undertone. (The sexual undertone doesn't have to be there all the time; however its long-term absence is a frequent failure mode.)

To protect this mutual feeling: Act in a safe way; don't ever hurt the other person physically or verbally. Express your love verbally (no need to be dramatic, just make frequent casual nice remarks) and non-verbally (short but frequent affectionate touches and hugs). In nice circumstances, look each other in the eyes. Be sexual once in a while, but not all the time (send a message that both modes are great with you). -- Read this book about individual differences, because I described what works in my relationship.

Typical mistakes: Acting safe doesn't mean you should stop joking and teasing. Actually, you shouldn't; you just need to calibrate and stop immediately when it becomes inconvenient for the other person. Just because you feel safe with the other person, don't make them your psychologist. It's okay to share some of your problems, but don't put the whole burden on a single person, just because the person is there and it's convenient for you. (Specifically for men in heterosexual relationships: make your partner feel safe and loved even when she is not in a mood for sex; but don't let too many days in a row pass asexually, because her mind can switch to "I love him, but I'm no longer in love with him" and suddenly you are friend-zoned and/or waiting for a divorce. Sex is part of the package, even if it doesn't include penetration.)

There is a role of deciding here -- you have to decide to act in a way that allows this feeling to develop, and to refrain from acting in a way that would destroy it. But the feeling is emotional, chemical, you feel it, not just tell yourself that you have it. Maybe for people coming from healthy loving families the decision component is invisible, because that's how they behave naturally. If you were less lucky, you have to pay attention. It's probably good do understand it explicitly, anyway, to prevent a random screwup. Also, this is how your partner should behave, too... if they don't, tell them... if they don't bother to listen, unfortunately I have a bad news for you. The good news is there are other people out there. Sometimes people need time to learn, but usually that also includes a change of partner.

Comment author: MixedNuts 23 February 2014 07:52:41PM 1 point [-]

I think your classification is missing something. I've had close trusted friends I had sexual desire for (whether I acted on it or not) without wanting to date them. B, as lucidian suggests, probably contains more sub-components.

Because of this, I can't understand the rest of your post. Thanks for the advice; it's good, but not new.

Does a normal good relationship happen like so?: "You develop obsession and (possibly later) desire, then closeness, then the obsession fades." (I'm not sure many people agree that Mature Adult Love takes less than six months to develop!) What is it like when the obsession fades?

Everyone says "three to six months" (with a few outliers saying one, two, or three years), and I'm starting to think this is evidence they trust what everyone else says over their own experience, rather than separate observations matching, because reported experiences differ wildly. In particular, many people think of love as intense friendship plus sex, while many others have a completely distinct romance drive.

In response to Is love a good idea?
Comment author: Viliam_Bur 22 February 2014 10:32:17AM *  28 points [-]

The obsessive part of love only lasts for three or six months, so it's not important in the long term. Think about it as an extra motivation to pay the initial costs of establishing the relationship. It would be evolutionarily maladaptive to become forever obsessed with your significant other, unable to focus on tasks of daily survival.

This is the part of love that most people get wrong: basicly anyone who gets their important life lessons from Hollywood movies. Hollywood describes the obsessive part as the "true love". People following this definition get into the predictable cycle of forming a new relationship, enjoying it intensely for a few months, noticing their obsession disappearing, interpreting it as an evidence that this actually wasn't the "true love", breaking apart and starting a new relationship... which again follows the same schedule; and some people can do this for decades. -- If this is what you noticed and want to avoid, you have a good point, but you are taking it too far.

(Some people express it cynically by saying that the main difference between eternal love and casual fling is that the casual fling lasts longer.)

I don't think about love as a blind precommitment forever, but rather like this: I found a person who cooperates with me in a Prisonners' Dilemma, so the game theory is telling me to keep cooperating... if the other person keeps playing by the rules, possibly forever, because that's the winning strategy. Of course there is some imperfection in humans, and some noise in human communication, so I'm ready to forgive some minor problems. But that's still because I am profitting in the long term. -- If I would realize that my significant other abuses me, I would get out of the relationship. The important part of love is finding a person who is able and willing to reciprocate love. (Many beautiful people aren't.) Also, being that kind of person. (It's a learnt ability.)

As a data point, living with my girlfriend makes almost every day of my life better. Just eating breakfast with someone else is better than eating alone: if I multiply it with the expected remaining days of my life, that's a huge stack of utilons; I would be stupid to give it up. And that's just the fucking breakfast. On a boring ordinary day. Which happens automatically, without me having to do anything special; even on days when I am tired or busy. -- For me the conclusion is obvious. But it took years of learning and experimenting.

Comment author: MixedNuts 22 February 2014 10:39:49PM 6 points [-]

The obsessive part of love only lasts for three or six months

I've never been in Mature Adult Love. Is it a real thing, or just having no particular feelings but deciding you like the company? What is it like?

In response to comment by MixedNuts on Tell Culture
Comment author: shokwave 19 January 2014 09:12:57AM *  20 points [-]

This is a horrible thing to do to a Guesser. (I agree denotatively, but...)

It took me almost six months from meeting a particular Guess person to realise this: the times I offended them clustered according to whether I was a soldier in their war, not by my actual actions.[0]

Lots of things, maybe most things you can do in a conversation are horrible things to do to a Guesser. I'm well above average for social skills plus a few points above LW average IQ and even I find it hard to navigate conversations with a Guesser (I swear I have better social skills than that previous arrogant statement implies). The way I have found to not constantly insult and offend them is to take a lot of time to learn their particular 'dialect' of Guess.

I didn't grow up in a Guess culture, so at my first exposure to it I was already a mind that could think for itself - and my thought was "Guess culture is manipulative." It stacks up complicated laws, some of which are enforced ridiculously strictly[1] and others that are loosely enforced, if at all[2], so a skilled Guesser has both a minefield of rules, and an arsenal of selectively enforced rules, to use in conversation.

This is scary. If I walk into a conversation with a Guesser and I have something at stake, I am likely to lose that stake. Dealing with them feels like dealing with a negative utility monster; I must sacrifice too much to avoid offending.

(Please don't vote this post up because it bashes the hateful Guess enemy; evaluate it on its merits.)

0: I could use ableist slurs (insane; crazy) freely to deride people, institutions, papers etc that argued for no gendered pay gap, for biological difference between race, etc. But it was a serious transgression to use the same slurs to describe people, institutions, or papers that argued for parapsychology, telepathy, etc. Once I noticed this, I tested it experimentally - even when you know you're doing it for science, it hurts to offend a Guesser.

1: "Giving a negative response when someone asks for evaluations on their appearance / idea / whatever" is banned. (The only way you can provide that information is to guess at their personal evaluation, and then give the least warm approval you think has a plausible interpretation that agrees with their actual personal evaluation, which will be revealed only after you've made your social move. Yech.)

2: Gossip is frowned on. You can gossip all you like until you say something they don't like hearing, at which point you've offended them by gossiping.

In response to comment by shokwave on Tell Culture
Comment author: MixedNuts 24 January 2014 08:39:40PM 0 points [-]

What's your policy for interacting with Patrick? Do you get along? I have some of the same problems you describe about walking on eggshells around Guessers.

View more: Next