> If you think I'm exaggerating, ask them a question about economics or health care, and listen as they "expertly" explain Everything(tm) to you. In my circles

> If you think I'm exaggerating, ask them a question about economics or health care, and listen as they "expertly" explain Everything(tm) to you. In my circles "rationalist" is widely used to describe a person who holds opinions as "untainted" by emotions as a human could possibly have them. Meaning there is a describeable chain of independently-verifiable rational facts that take you from A to B, yet they are not married to the conclusion and you can reason them out of their positions if you can spot a hole in the process. And no, not a single one of the people I know would dare pretend they know better than experts in the field. They might ask informed questions and poke around using their "standard" logic brain-instruments, but they mind their tone and proyect relentless curiosity instead of hubris. I am sure that people can abuse this thought-technology to peddle bullshit or to proyect an image of being all-knowing entites. In my case stumbling across LessWrong and later on SlateStarCodex got me started on trying to decouple emotions from the reality that causes them. It has helped me immensely in my never-ending quest to try to be the best possible version of myself. > Ffs, even the label "rationalist" itself is pathetic, and very revealing. It's basically a way to signal "I am right, take my word for it". That sounds abrassive to me and I wouldn't want to talk with that kind of people either, whatever labels they are wielding at the moment. I wonder if there is a cultural-bubble effect at play here, or if I have been lucky to not encounter them just yet.