I have mixed feelings about that essay. One point is exactly what I was trying to say, but I suspect the observation about identity is wrong. Many great discove

I have mixed feelings about that essay. One point is exactly what I was trying to say, but I suspect the observation about identity is wrong. Many great discoveries have come from people who were powerfully attached to an ideal: to take an odd assortment, consider Hilbert, Keynes and Milton Friedman. I suspect there's an availability bias. Consider a table: | | Has Identity | No Identity | |----------------+--------------+-------------| | Thoughtful | Insightful | Insightful | | Not Thoughtful | Obnoxious | Silent | We confuse having an identity with being thoughtless because we see so many people who combine the two, not because their identity actually makes them less thoughtful. Flat Earthers are an interesting example in this case. There wasn't an identity attached to it, it doesn't support some political or religious cause (maybe it's not become an identity, but it didn't start as one). It's just catnip for people who think they're skeptical and free-thinkers, but are actually just bad at reasoning.