I think the fuzzies vs rationality thing goes a way to explain why some people, even those who appreciate rationality, might want to turn down an unfavorable offer in the ultimatum game. The sour feeling from accepting that, may not be worth the money you didn't even loose. I am entirely fine with being irrational in that game. This makes me wonder how the general LW populace would play that game, if it was okay to not be rational
I just jumped straight into the chat without reading this post, because hell, the link was there and I might as well take a looksie. Turns out it was study time, and I quickly found myself grabbing that book i had to read for school out of 'oh shit sorry to interrupt', and read the remainder of that school day. This will be my new routine.
And now I'm looking at my case of delicious candy, considering whether I should only be allowed to eat one for every session I work outside of school time..
I've seen a quoted piece of literature in the commentssection, but instead of the original letters, they all seemed to be replaced by others. I think i remember seeing this more than once, and I still have no idea why that should in any way be like that is
It feels odd replying to a 4 year old comment, but I am simply too curious as to why all that text in written in what at first glance seems to be random assemblies of letters in the format of whatever Greg Egans story was
Sometimes, I find myself just smirking at this community with the sense of 'I fukken love this place'. Often I find it pulling out vague thoughts and concepts I hadn't fully thought out, and then add to it. This is one of the more useful thoughts that has been fleshed out for me; that polyhacking is a possibility and quite possibly worth considering in the future. It could be a way to suit something to myself, because monogamy seems impossible to work into a successful scenario. I would like some intimate romantic company, without the responsibility of being the one sole person to satisfy anothers' needs, and not being grounded to one person would keep me from getting bored and exploring more. Self-hacking is a fun practice, although I prefer the term 'mental rearrangement'
When I was way younger and mildly depressed (and blessed with an incredibly stable hedonic setpoint), I used this quite a bit. First I made a 'I am not a serious person' identity (which unfortunately still bites me in the ass today) so I didn't take that sadness serious and could just dismiss it (seriously, use the right identity traits; I became way too good at dismissing sadness), and later a compartment/helper identity of 'going through this phase is normal and you'll likely grow out of it, you may not feel at all like it; probability is on your side', which helped tremendously in making me stay positive
It's incredible how far you can get just by implementing false identities and beliefs and habits and merge them into yourself. It's almost ridiculous, really
I called my math teacher over to help. We couldn't find the answer. This isn't promising, as I had hoped to summon him for help whenever I needed help to understand something above my highschool math education. I will make a quick request for what steps of math i should follow to have a better chance of wrapping my mind around this probability stuff, since part of my exam test seriously has 'there are four playing cards, one is red, what is the probability of randomly picking red' or something like that.
Regardless of such concerns; I'm pretty sure the 'I don't care, I just want to know' part of it is simply curiosity, and doesn't mean that Brennan would in any way accept silly theologies as truth, even should he be curious as to what they were teaching. I find myself plenty curious about Buddhist teachings, but in the same way I am curious about the way magic works in the TypeMoon worlds
I wouldn't let one persons powerful writing alone decide such a thing, but for the compassion you show to everyone's' lives, I suppose the least i can do to repay that, would be by learning more about it. I don't happen to care much about what happens after the lights first goes out, and extending the care for my life to beyond my own death isn't really a part of my reasoning. I've never been religious or thought of an afterlife, so I don't even have that practice. The dead don't care
A recommended use for the site as it currently is:
A major use of LessWrong is an introduction to many fields of knowledge. It's like a catalog, presenting summarized subjects in tasty bites, which can be used to direct your focus towards what you're really interested in, or create said interest. It's a nice representation of rationality, and gives you a sense of what it is and why you should desire it. Posts on scholarship and the like will teach you the best ways to learn. And sprinkled along this road, is lots of eyeopeners and quick updates to your thinking, things to help you to notice your own faults so you can fix them (this article is an example of such) as well as presenting many topics and ideas which can help direct your thinking towards the best way to learn and improve.
This is the pleasant little pond for us little fish to grow in, eating the delicious shinies and preparing for a journey into the sea. Devour everything, plan, make some maps, pack your mental backpack, and know that if you truly wish to learn, you'll one day have to leave. This whole process need only take a few months, and soon I will have eaten everything on this site, and my plan is being refined, books are being found, goals clarified..
I would like it if you didn't linger so much on a mere spelling mistake. I had no muscle memory for how to spell this entirely foreign name. Eliezer Yudkowski; i hope you are satisfied, for thy name is surely glorious and worthy of praise.
I've also first discovered the mail-notification system, hence why it took me so long to respond