> Then maybe the difference between rationalists and anti-rationalists is that rationalists use heuristics sparingly and are willing to question them, and anti-

> Then maybe the difference between rationalists and anti-rationalists is that rationalists use heuristics sparingly and are willing to question them, and anti-rationalists follow heuristics religiously (or even slavishly)? [...] I think everybody follows some combination strategy of mostly depending on heuristics, but using explicit computation to decide what heuristics to have, or what to do when heuristics conflict, or whether a certain heuristic should apply in some novel situation. This is the difference. The rationalists do the computation in situations that had warranted it in the past, and keep an eye out for new situations that should call for it. Others generally do not. They use heuristics on top of heuristics, and social proof, etc, etc. They don't care if they have a correct answer, just the right one.