On your earlier debate with Huemer, I say that we decide what to believe by deciding who to believe. I pick an expert who thinks like me (methodologically, not necessarily ideologically) and who can explain his or her reasoning in terms that I can understand.
On communities, I have a lot of trouble landing in one that makes me comfortable. But of the two you describe, I definitely would feel more comfortable with the folks who will end up with grandchildren.
I think what you do is closer to what I do, since you are evaluating the expert’s arguments not just his credentials. But I wouldn’t limit myself to one expert and would try to find the best arguments against the position I am inclined to support.
In some fields, one can add to that by evaluating a potential expert to add to one's pool in a field by checking their past output for predictions that have since resolved. In most fields, one can do something a little similar, checking past output for novel at the time claims, and seeing how well those claims have stood the test of increasing evidence and scrutiny. That is easier to do once one already has a few experts.
That is somewhat time and effort expensive, and shouldn't be used to rule out experts opposing one's own view - those experts can be wrong all the time for reasons other than competence, and still come up with strong arguments against one's own position.
"There was, however, one talk at Less Wrong titled".... I assume you mean "Less Online".
I live in NH now (not a Free Stater, just found a lake house I liked...and low taxes), but about 35 years ago I came very close to moving to the Bay Area, mainly because my intellectual interests (then and now) fit way better with those grey tribe folks (even tho culturally I fit better with the Free Staters; there's a lot to be said in favor of tested stuff that works).
This seems like additional reason for me not to regret deciding not to go to LessOnline last year or this year despite the free ticket offer. Last year I inferred from the assurance that it was family-friendly *because there was some sort of formalized child-care arrangement*, that the other spaces were implicitly hostile to children by my standards. Not acutely or especially hostile, but the sort of implicit hostility embedded in the vibe of professionalism or academic intellectualism. This year I guessed it would be similar despite no formalized child care arrangement.
Relatedly, when I brought my household to the local "warm, welcoming" Conservative synagogue, the only adult who played with / meaningfully recognized my toddler was the (non-Jewish, and clearly lower-class than the typical or maybe even any member of the synagogue) custodian.
I'm looking forward to trying out Porcfest next year; any other festivals I should consider?
In a little less than two weeks we are leaving for Pennsic, but although it is child friendly it is specifically aimed at SCA historical recreation people. Nothing else occurs to me.
Thanks! That sounds considerably more appealing than a Ren Faire. My guess is that since my oldest child is under 3, I shouldn't make a strong effort to go this year, but might want to check it out next year.
It is very unlike a Ren Faire — no audience, only participants. Our daughter attended her first in utero, both kids every year growing up.
It may be too late for this year unless you are already in the SCA, since you would need appropriate garb for all of you and probably a tent, although some people get a motel room twenty or thirty minutes away and day trip it. But you might consider for next year.
How on earth did you come to be reading Kulak? I didn’t think you’d ever hung out on The Motte, where we had the pleasure of his company for quite a while.
I think I googled on Porcfest last year and came across the article, although it is possible that someone else pointed it out to me. For obvious reasons I found it interesting.
I don't hang out on the Motte. The only one of the SSC successors that I spend much time on is DSL.
“While Rationalists mostly reject existing religions, my impression is that they are trying to invent their own, non-theist, version.”
I agree with this.
Older progressives worship Mother Gaia and have unwavering faith that “climate change” must be stopped.
The religion of younger leftists is oppressor-oppressed ideology. Which is why they can ignore civilization vs barbarism (thx, AK) and be pro-Hamas and believe it righteous for Israel to cease to exist.
All of which demonstrates that David Foster Wallace was correct when he wrote “There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship.”
I am curious: in your estimation what percentage of those Berkeley Rationalists don’t grok that in fact they worship too?
> “While Rationalists mostly reject existing religions, my impression is that they are trying to invent their own, non-theist, version.”
> I agree with this.
"Rationalist" types have been trying, and failing, at doing that for at least half a millennium. Unitarian Universalism is the latest attempt. Earlier attempts included the "ethical societies" of the 19th century and Auguste Comte's Religion of Humanity.
Some time back I pointed some rationalists at the example of the Humanists, after speaking at a humanist event and observing the lack of young people in the audience.
Most rationalists are antiwoke. Also, they have a series of texts about how to rationalize written by one guy that they espouse people read called "the sequences". I think among non-theist subcultures they are generally "in in the joke".
1. I think your star power might have pulled people in for poetry. You have a lot more of it in the FSP. IME, rationalists like poetry more. I remember I recited some at MoM ereyesteryear.
2. For rationalist Shabbats, there is one in NYC with Hebrew singing. Also, NYC rationalists have a rationalist Seder as a public event, with a part-traditional/part-neo-Haggadah (mostly neo).
I've been to PorcFest a couple times but never got into FSP culture. I've been an ancap for a very long time. I lived in a rationalist group house in Berkeley for a few months. I've met you many times, I'm the guy who moved from Sunnyvale to NW Arkansas. I only think that you underestimate rationalist poetry appreciation and over estimated libertarian poetry appreciation. Aside from that this post is quite accurate.
On your earlier debate with Huemer, I say that we decide what to believe by deciding who to believe. I pick an expert who thinks like me (methodologically, not necessarily ideologically) and who can explain his or her reasoning in terms that I can understand.
On communities, I have a lot of trouble landing in one that makes me comfortable. But of the two you describe, I definitely would feel more comfortable with the folks who will end up with grandchildren.
I think what you do is closer to what I do, since you are evaluating the expert’s arguments not just his credentials. But I wouldn’t limit myself to one expert and would try to find the best arguments against the position I am inclined to support.
In some fields, one can add to that by evaluating a potential expert to add to one's pool in a field by checking their past output for predictions that have since resolved. In most fields, one can do something a little similar, checking past output for novel at the time claims, and seeing how well those claims have stood the test of increasing evidence and scrutiny. That is easier to do once one already has a few experts.
That is somewhat time and effort expensive, and shouldn't be used to rule out experts opposing one's own view - those experts can be wrong all the time for reasons other than competence, and still come up with strong arguments against one's own position.
"There was, however, one talk at Less Wrong titled".... I assume you mean "Less Online".
I live in NH now (not a Free Stater, just found a lake house I liked...and low taxes), but about 35 years ago I came very close to moving to the Bay Area, mainly because my intellectual interests (then and now) fit way better with those grey tribe folks (even tho culturally I fit better with the Free Staters; there's a lot to be said in favor of tested stuff that works).
I still wonder if I made the right choice.
I think it is easier to share intellectual interests online than shared culture, which is an argument in favor of the choice you made.
Thanks for pointing out the error. I have fixed it.
This seems like additional reason for me not to regret deciding not to go to LessOnline last year or this year despite the free ticket offer. Last year I inferred from the assurance that it was family-friendly *because there was some sort of formalized child-care arrangement*, that the other spaces were implicitly hostile to children by my standards. Not acutely or especially hostile, but the sort of implicit hostility embedded in the vibe of professionalism or academic intellectualism. This year I guessed it would be similar despite no formalized child care arrangement.
Relatedly, when I brought my household to the local "warm, welcoming" Conservative synagogue, the only adult who played with / meaningfully recognized my toddler was the (non-Jewish, and clearly lower-class than the typical or maybe even any member of the synagogue) custodian.
I'm looking forward to trying out Porcfest next year; any other festivals I should consider?
In a little less than two weeks we are leaving for Pennsic, but although it is child friendly it is specifically aimed at SCA historical recreation people. Nothing else occurs to me.
Thanks! That sounds considerably more appealing than a Ren Faire. My guess is that since my oldest child is under 3, I shouldn't make a strong effort to go this year, but might want to check it out next year.
It is very unlike a Ren Faire — no audience, only participants. Our daughter attended her first in utero, both kids every year growing up.
It may be too late for this year unless you are already in the SCA, since you would need appropriate garb for all of you and probably a tent, although some people get a motel room twenty or thirty minutes away and day trip it. But you might consider for next year.
How on earth did you come to be reading Kulak? I didn’t think you’d ever hung out on The Motte, where we had the pleasure of his company for quite a while.
I think I googled on Porcfest last year and came across the article, although it is possible that someone else pointed it out to me. For obvious reasons I found it interesting.
I don't hang out on the Motte. The only one of the SSC successors that I spend much time on is DSL.
One minor correction, Kulak is female.
I am not an American and have not traveled to the US in over 20 years. If I do I would like to attend Porcfest.
He’s male - the catgirl thing is a weird persona he’s apparently adopted since leaving The Motte.
At one point in twitter he admitted to crafting every aspect of his online persona to maximize engagement.
“While Rationalists mostly reject existing religions, my impression is that they are trying to invent their own, non-theist, version.”
I agree with this.
Older progressives worship Mother Gaia and have unwavering faith that “climate change” must be stopped.
The religion of younger leftists is oppressor-oppressed ideology. Which is why they can ignore civilization vs barbarism (thx, AK) and be pro-Hamas and believe it righteous for Israel to cease to exist.
All of which demonstrates that David Foster Wallace was correct when he wrote “There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship.”
I am curious: in your estimation what percentage of those Berkeley Rationalists don’t grok that in fact they worship too?
> “While Rationalists mostly reject existing religions, my impression is that they are trying to invent their own, non-theist, version.”
> I agree with this.
"Rationalist" types have been trying, and failing, at doing that for at least half a millennium. Unitarian Universalism is the latest attempt. Earlier attempts included the "ethical societies" of the 19th century and Auguste Comte's Religion of Humanity.
Some time back I pointed some rationalists at the example of the Humanists, after speaking at a humanist event and observing the lack of young people in the audience.
Most rationalists are antiwoke. Also, they have a series of texts about how to rationalize written by one guy that they espouse people read called "the sequences". I think among non-theist subcultures they are generally "in in the joke".
They still preemptively obeyed the "woke" agenda by rationalizing anti-epistemology on gender, in ways Zack Davis has extensively documented:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/esRZaPXSHgWzyB2NL/where-to-draw-the-boundaries
https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/ZjXtjRQaD2b4PAser/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning
> Most rationalists are antiwoke.
Sort of. They have, however, imbibed many woke ideas by osmosis. The number of "trannies" among them is one sign of this.
I think that is more culture than agenda.
I did not mean to imply that most of the Rationalists are woke. Apologies if you read it that way.
From DF’s description, they are worshipping something, but whatever it is, I agree that it is not oppressor-oppressed ideology.
1. I think your star power might have pulled people in for poetry. You have a lot more of it in the FSP. IME, rationalists like poetry more. I remember I recited some at MoM ereyesteryear.
2. For rationalist Shabbats, there is one in NYC with Hebrew singing. Also, NYC rationalists have a rationalist Seder as a public event, with a part-traditional/part-neo-Haggadah (mostly neo).
Have you experienced both cultures? If so, what parts of my post do you think I got wrong?
I've been to PorcFest a couple times but never got into FSP culture. I've been an ancap for a very long time. I lived in a rationalist group house in Berkeley for a few months. I've met you many times, I'm the guy who moved from Sunnyvale to NW Arkansas. I only think that you underestimate rationalist poetry appreciation and over estimated libertarian poetry appreciation. Aside from that this post is quite accurate.