Name: Alex Hedtke
Came here via HPMOR, stayed for the rationality.
Organizer for the Kansas City Rationalists, founder and co-organizer for Kansas City Effective Altruism.
"God of the EA community"? The majority of my city's EA community doesn't even know who Yudkowsky is, and of the few who do most have ambivalent opinions of him.
The primary goal of this document is to articulate my personal moral philosophy, and I use the Mohism branding because it has strong corollaries to said moral philosophy, but otherwise I am reinventing it from scratch.I do think that a lot of the core tenets are widely (if subconsciously) held. As for the ones that aren't widely held, I personally think they should be. But, like any good Neo-Mohist, I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. ;)The phrasing of this as a philosophy for others to adopt is mostly an aesthetic decision, a reframing to help me look at it more critically.
Thanks for the feedback! Basing it on Mohism is more of an aesthetic decision than anything; if classical Mohism has an issue then Neo-Mohism should set out to solve it. :)I think there's a difference between "no fixed standards" and "the ability to update standards in light of new evidence". Neo-Mohism is definitely about "strong opinions, weakly held" kind of thing. The standards it sets forth are only to be overturned by failing a test, and until then should be treated as the best answer so far.
If you would like to attend a Guild mixer to meet the Council and some of the students, come join us saturday! We expect to do this on a monthly or quarterly basis.https://bit.ly/3lOco5O
Never mind, I found your calendly. Got us scheduled for friday. :)
I would like to get set up! :)
Please note that we have added a Google Form for registration, to make sure we have enough food.
No, the best way to convince me is to show me data. Evidence I can actually update on, instead of self-reporting on results that may be poisoned by motivated reasoning, or any number of other biases. Data I can show to people who know what they are talking about, that they will take seriously.
I see Bayesian Rationality as a methodology as much as it is a calculation.
It's being aware of our own prior beliefs, the confidence intervals of those beliefs, keeping those priors as close to the base rates as possible, being cognizant of how our biases can influence our perception of all this, trying to mitigate the effects of those biases, and updating based on the strength of evidence.
I'm trying to get better at math so I can do better calculations. It's a major flaw in my technique I acknowledge and am trying to change.
But as you noted earlier, none of this answers my question.
If I am not currently practicing your art, and you believe your art is good, what evidence do you have to support that claim?
A strong correlation between adopting the virtues and established methods of rationality, and an increased quality of life, but yeah; more handwavey.
I don't even know what calculations could be made. That's sorta why I'm here.