This comment will collect things that I think beginner rationalists, "naive" rationalists, or "old school" rationalists (these distinctions are in my head, I don't expect them to translate) do which don't help them.

Showing 3 of 12 replies (Click to show all)
2Hazard6moThought that is related to this general pattern, but not this example. Think of having an idea of an end skill that you're excited by (doing bayes updates irl, successfully implementing TAPs, being swayed by "solid logical arguments"). Also imagine not having a theory of change. I personally have sometimes not noticed that there is or could be an actual theory of how to move from A to B (often because I thought I should already be able to do that), and so would use the black box negative reinforcement strategy on myself. Being in that place involved being stuck for a while and feeling bad about being stuck. Progress was only made when I managed to go "Oh. There are steps to get from A to B. I can't expect to already know them. I most focus on understanding this progression, and not on just punishing myself whenever I fail."
1Pattern6moNon-rhetorical. The spelling suggestion suggests an improvement which largely unambiguous/style-agnostic. Suggesting adding a word requires choosing a word - a matter which is ambiguous/style dependent. Sometimes writing contains grammatical errors - but when people other than the author suggest fixes, the fixes don't have the same voice. This is why I included a prompt for what word you (Hazard) would use. For clarity, I can make less vague comments in the future. What I wanted to say rephrased: Here the [] serve one purpose - suggesting improvement, even when there's multiple choices.

Aaaah, I see now. Just edited to what I think fits.

Hazard's Shortform Feed

by Hazard 1 min read4th Feb 2018216 comments

In light of reading through Raemon's shortform feed, I'm making my own. Here will be smaller ideas that are on my mind.