> "That's not what the final advice is, the author is suggesting the use of "meta-rationality"" I think you mis-read that section of the essay, because the who

> "That's not what the final advice is, the author is suggesting the use of "meta-rationality"" I think you mis-read that section of the essay, because the whole conclusion of the meta-rationality section was the quote that I already gave in my comment, “And so we should try to do better along lots of axes.” Literally, that is the sum-up of advice in the lone section of the essay that possibly has any call to action or advice. It gives a fairly quick and superficial overview of meta-rationality (which is OK), but does not say anything at all about putting it into practice except for "doing better" on "multiple axes" (literally, this is all it says). So when you say the "final advice" is meta-rationality -- that's already what I was talking about. That's exactly the part where the essay fails to give any type of actionable payoff at all.