flaritza's Shortform
Mar 6, 20211
flaritza
7
1
7
Do you mind expanding on "no room for being skeptical" and how that relates to my first paragraph? I am curious on the connection. Is it that the authors of the posts who are the subject of my criticism of not sounding "universal enough" in their posts, prefer rationality, and so they are not skeptical enough of it as to make it more accessible for other types of people? Or is it something totally different..
Thanks for your reply. I am curious "you're likely to get some sympathy, but also some hostility and not necessarily much useful advice here." How are you defining hostile here and what may you think the hostility towards me would be in response to? Why would people be doing this if they aren't themselves emotionally shaken deeply to tears by something I write or say? Just for the fun of it?
I am wondering how thought organization is defined, and if there is a good template to assess if it has been achieved in a writing sample . Right now it just seems like an intuitive sense people have and use to put down others when they think others haven't achieved it.
I feel pretty unhappy that many of the posts on LW and the likes that are geared towards seemingly sounding "universal" in their prescriptions for how to arrive at accurate beliefs, how to change your beliefs, how to recognize your biases, double-cruxing, so on, all assume this hard to define baseline emotional stability/technical intelligence that just isn't spelled out anywhere and if it isn't achieved, is used as a reason to discard certain individuals as those able to benefit from the posts.
There do actually exist individuals, not a novel mind-blowing statement I'm trying to make here, for whom every day to regulate their emotions to a level to which society does not... (read more)
"Sorry if I'm too harsh, but it seems to me that you are trying to do things the wrong way: get reputation first, do awesome things later. It's the other way round: do something awesome, then maybe advertise it a bit, people will notice and maybe remember, and then they will give more weight to your later opinions."
I can see how it's confusing that I may have suggested I wanted to do this wrong order for myself--I was asking the second question for someone else, actually, who has put in a lot of time/effort to build up lots of ideas/share them on this forum but has gotten very little traction.
I am making this post because I don't see this topic discussed often or at all. I am interested in learning proof based math. Currently I am working through Linear Algebra Done Wrong and Tao Analysis texts and doing the exercises. However, I also struggle with faint musical hallucinations at times, as well as brain fog. To correct the brain fog I take caffeine/sarcosine, however that can agitate me physically causing extreme shaking and cold sweats while still increasing my working memory, so it becomes a difficult trade off. I also find it difficult to consistently work out the steps of a proof--when I page in information into my working memory, often... (read more)
As a preface I am trying to treat myself of extremely loose (by societal standards and "technical" crowds) thought associations that can cause strong emotions and disrupt my mental scratchpad. I have resignedly accepted it may be some sort of schizophrenic process, and not some latent form of creativity, because so far it has not produced any results in the outside world.
Specifically, I am looking for feedback on how to decide and develop a good method to decide the order to explore the questions in my below list, and if any questions jump out to anyone as either easy to answer or seem like the most obvious first questions to answer. Second,... (read 1858 more words →)