5 ms·

> pick an idea that you are 100% sure is true. Not "the Earth is round" but "X value is good." Then search for people who disagree. The risk, of course, is get

> pick an idea that you are 100% sure is true. Not "the Earth is round" but "X value is good." Then search for people who disagree. The risk, of course, is getting convinced otherwise and having to live with that, in cases where "X value is good" is a socially useful and/or mandatory lie. Learning to think comes with its own dangers: knowing something isn't true requires more energy to hide it, and civilization is built on layers of lies. You could've gotten your head chopped off in the middle ages, for instance, for thinking anything naughty against the church and its leaders.

heavenlyblue 5y ago
Your opinion on this is akin to my parents opinion about sports: those who do sports get traumas and then regret it. Therefore don’t do sports. This is a very weak fallacy.
- 0xBABAD00C 5y ago
  I think you constructed and bravely defeated a weak strawman. My opinion is not akin to your parents' opinion at all. Everything comes with risk and reward, I was simply pointing out the risks. I never said "the reward isn't worth it". Diving into actions without understanding the risks is indeed a cognitive fallacy/blind spot.
- thatguy0900 5y ago
  It's not that much of a fallacy. What if you come to a socially unnaceptable conclusion about some ethnicity or culture after too much study? If you are a software dev that poses a significant risk to your job and social life.
  - heavenlyblue 5y ago
    > What if you come to a socially unnaceptable conclusion about some ethnicity or culture after too much study? If you are a software dev that poses a significant risk to your job and social life. What’s the difference between being silent about I because you don’t know it and being silent about it because you know you will be judged for it? It’s the equivalent argument for “Turn it off” in the Book of Mormon.
    - thatguy0900 5y ago
      It is very hard and obnoxious to consistently lie about your core beliefs in a group forever. It will foster resentment to be surrounded by people who openly mock or hate your opinion while you know you must remain silent. It is a very different situation to being neutral on it or agreeing with those people.
  - Levitz 5y ago
    What good is it to think by oneself if it isn't to arrive to views that wouldn't be given to you by society? If you are right and society is wrong, then you stand a chance to correct an enormous mistake. If you are wrong and society is right, it is by people like you who argue against common tenets that they become hard to argue against. It's not worth it on a personal level, but very few things short of running for a position are worth it politically on a personal level, it is only on a societal level that they make sense.
ethanbond 5y ago
When that happens go to William James and read Pragmatism, then realize you can just decide what you want to believe based on what is adaptive for you. (Easier said than done, and first requires convincing yourself that “true” is often less valuable than “useful.”)
- 0xBABAD00C 5y ago
  > When that happens go to William James and read Pragmatism, then realize you can just decide what you want to believe based on what is adaptive for you. Now when that happens, also make sure to remember all the adaptationists who stayed silent and turned a blind eye on all the atrocities committed by their governments and leaders, in their name and with their silent agreement. Ultimately this comes down to individual and group-level optimization strategies: do we exploit the current hill of the fitness landscape we are on, or do we explore to find other hills on this landscape. Adaptive silence is conforming with the group to stay on the current hill, truth-seeking at all costs is sending scouts to explore other hills with the possibility of discovering new heights for the group. A highly social and truly adaptive species needs a combination of both strategies, it's a delicate balance and neither extreme is smart or risk-free.
  - rileyphone 5y ago
    Let us search for novelty and new niches! That’s why I love this forum, above all else it brings in similar types who blaze epistemic trails.
Zababa 5y ago
This is an inherent risk to a lot of things that not many people talk about. Learning more things, seeing more of the world always comes with a risk of feeling trapped in your old life at the end. This is true for abstract things like thinking about freedom or liberty or equality, but also for pedestrian things like trying a better than usual toilet paper.

heavenlyblue 5y ago

Your opinion on this is akin to my parents opinion about sports: those who do sports get traumas and then regret it. Therefore don’t do sports. This is a very weak fallacy.

0xBABAD00C 5y ago
I think you constructed and bravely defeated a weak strawman. My opinion is not akin to your parents' opinion at all. Everything comes with risk and reward, I was simply pointing out the risks. I never said "the reward isn't worth it". Diving into actions without understanding the risks is indeed a cognitive fallacy/blind spot.
thatguy0900 5y ago
It's not that much of a fallacy. What if you come to a socially unnaceptable conclusion about some ethnicity or culture after too much study? If you are a software dev that poses a significant risk to your job and social life.
- heavenlyblue 5y ago
  > What if you come to a socially unnaceptable conclusion about some ethnicity or culture after too much study? If you are a software dev that poses a significant risk to your job and social life. What’s the difference between being silent about I because you don’t know it and being silent about it because you know you will be judged for it? It’s the equivalent argument for “Turn it off” in the Book of Mormon.
  - thatguy0900 5y ago
    It is very hard and obnoxious to consistently lie about your core beliefs in a group forever. It will foster resentment to be surrounded by people who openly mock or hate your opinion while you know you must remain silent. It is a very different situation to being neutral on it or agreeing with those people.
- Levitz 5y ago
  What good is it to think by oneself if it isn't to arrive to views that wouldn't be given to you by society? If you are right and society is wrong, then you stand a chance to correct an enormous mistake. If you are wrong and society is right, it is by people like you who argue against common tenets that they become hard to argue against. It's not worth it on a personal level, but very few things short of running for a position are worth it politically on a personal level, it is only on a societal level that they make sense.

ethanbond 5y ago

When that happens go to William James and read Pragmatism, then realize you can just decide what you want to believe based on what is adaptive for you. (Easier said than done, and first requires convincing yourself that “true” is often less valuable than “useful.”)

0xBABAD00C 5y ago
> When that happens go to William James and read Pragmatism, then realize you can just decide what you want to believe based on what is adaptive for you. Now when that happens, also make sure to remember all the adaptationists who stayed silent and turned a blind eye on all the atrocities committed by their governments and leaders, in their name and with their silent agreement. Ultimately this comes down to individual and group-level optimization strategies: do we exploit the current hill of the fitness landscape we are on, or do we explore to find other hills on this landscape. Adaptive silence is conforming with the group to stay on the current hill, truth-seeking at all costs is sending scouts to explore other hills with the possibility of discovering new heights for the group. A highly social and truly adaptive species needs a combination of both strategies, it's a delicate balance and neither extreme is smart or risk-free.
- rileyphone 5y ago
  Let us search for novelty and new niches! That’s why I love this forum, above all else it brings in similar types who blaze epistemic trails.

Zababa 5y ago

This is an inherent risk to a lot of things that not many people talk about. Learning more things, seeing more of the world always comes with a risk of feeling trapped in your old life at the end. This is true for abstract things like thinking about freedom or liberty or equality, but also for pedestrian things like trying a better than usual toilet paper.