All of fitw's Comments + Replies

Apologies if I am being stupid (or if others have asked this question), but I have some basic confusion:

<i>At least 90% of my suffering disappeared in an instant, never to return. I had hit Stream Entry, the first major checkpoint on the road to Enlightenment...For my entire life, much of my behavior had been driven by desire. I didn't have desire anymore, but</i>

and after this you say you had to go to a mental ward because you started identifying more stuff as suffering. Am I reading it correctly that stream entry supposedly made your life imm... (read more)

4lsusr
I went to the hospital not because I started identifying more stuff as suffering. Identifying more stuff as suffering is par for the course. That's meditation working as intended. I went to the hospital because I went too hard too fast and fried myself. It's like weightlifting. Weightlifting makes my life better, but if you to heavy before you're ready, you'll injure yourself. That's what happened to me. If you lift weights slowly and safely it's fine. As for whether stream entry is a good thing for most people, that is a complex topic beyond the scope of this post.

Good point. I didn't know these examples, so my comment is at least partially wrong. I am puzzled about Brahmi numerals: that is supposedly Ashokan Brahmi, but India did not have numerals at the time of Ashoka.

AFAIK, Indians used the little endian notation. Arabs reversed it since they were writing from left to right, but the Europeans did not reverse what the Arabs did. Today of course Indians follow the west in using big endian, but the little endian practice reflects in, for instance, the ka-ṭa-pa-yā-di  system used in Indian musicology ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system ).

4Menotim
Katapayadi does seem to be little endian, but the examples I found on Wikipedia of old Indian numerals and their predecessor, Brahmi numerals, seem to be big-endian.

Would love more commentary on how you seem to go from cooperation to altered state of consciousness, specifically, from (i) below to (ii) below:

(i) Your comment <blockquote>I live in a local pocket of the universe where even my interactions with complete strangers – such as the salespeople at stores – tend to be friendly and warm in tone, or at least politely neutral.</blockquote> This, I can and do believe, is a natural denouement of cooperation.

(ii) That bit about altered states of consciousness ("pure love"?). It is not clear to me that this... (read more)

2Kaj_Sotala
I agree, and I don't mean to suggest that increased "social intelligence" would automatically take one to altered states, nor that increasing one's ability for cooperation would necessarily lead one to them. The connection is more the other way around. The states are ones in which something like the algorithm for cooperation is activated unusually strongly, so if one can get to those states and get an experience of what that mindstate is like, then it can be easier to try to achieve that kind of a mindstate in "real life" and increase one's ability for cooperation there. That being said, it's not a completely one-way connection, since once certain prerequisites have been unlocked then practicing the mindstate in "real life" also makes it easier to get into the altered states, since the mind is already more inclined in that direction. (I'm simplifying things quite a bit here since a proper elaboration of this caveat would require another essay.) Also having the mind strongly inclined in that direction already can make it easier to unlock the prerequisites and reach the altered states - for example, some people go quite easily from loving-kindness meditation to bliss states, in part because they've already practiced (maybe without being consciously aware of it) habits of mind that make it easy to incline themselves towards loving-kindness.

I don't have any answer, but I have similar-seeming problems (or so I believe). One thing I would like to understand better is whether the problem of "attention span" is really an umbrella term for many different kinds of problems, and understand it in a Kaj Sotala-kind of framework of internal systems. For instance, one can have an attention span problem while reading, because of any of the following reasons (sorry for the long list; please let me know if I am spamming):

1(a) Reading involves effort, which an internal subsystem doesn't want to expend.

1(b) ... (read more)

3trevor
This is exactly the kind of thinking I was hoping to encounter. Do you have any further reading or solution proposals for some of the problems listed here?

While I understand that many would find this post irrelevant and distractionary to lesswrong, I can't make sense of a comment like "I did not even want to know the information contained in the title of this post (about which candidate is entering the upcoming national election in the US), and am irritated that I learned it on LessWrong. So I have downvoted."

There is a view that "syncretism" used to be the "default" religious response and natural human tendency (well, why not maximize your portfolio and hedge your bets?), but that a minority of religions that explicitly defined themselves in opposition to other religions had huge evolutionary success, and some of them have shaped modernity.

Sorry I don't have anything useful to comment, but just wanted to thank you profusely for this post. I relate pretty strongly to these very problems, especially the uncertainty of usefulness (often the certainty of uselessness) and the opportunity cost considerations. I don't know any good article where someone talks about handling this issue.

2MSRayne
I'm glad you like it! Something that I meant to point out in the post is that this pattern of mine implies that not only do I not have coherent preferences, they're not even temporally coherent - that is, not only do different parts of me disagree on utility, but I disagree with myself at other times on it as well. I'm really about as non-agentic as it's possible to be and still get things done occasionally!