4 ms·

I don’t think I can persuade someone away from one of their core values. Best I can do is put ideas out there and hope to make some impression on someone. That

I don’t think I can persuade someone away from one of their core values. Best I can do is put ideas out there and hope to make some impression on someone. That said, treating discussions as a mutual exchange of information is precisely the thing that I find insufficient (outside the literal sense in which everything is a mere exchange of information). Discussion is about persuasion and collective decision making. You can’t find truth and seek agreement just by collecting more data. Rationalists seem to have the sense that we’re all just on the cusp of enlightenment, if we only had a bit more information. They refuse to accept the world as the messy and confusing thing that it is. But as I said, that’s not a point of view that I can dissuade anyone from directly. You can only sway people who aren’t personally invested in the subject. Edit: Since you asked about being persuaded, I find that that my views change slowly and naturally as I think through the points I’m making and experience different things. Of course if someone could set me straight though an internet comment box that would be a great shortcut, but since we’ve all formed our points of view through a lifetime of experience it usually doesn’t work that way.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
I think we see eye-to eye on a couple things, and disagree on others. I agree most people's core values only shift slowly over time. However, most topics of discussion or debate are not about core values themselves. they are about loosely related topics bound by layers of assumptions and beliefs. This is where information sharing is important, and fundamental to learning. I don't know that anyone can find truth without a process of learning. On the other-hand, I don't see collective decision making and persuasion as a route to truth or learning at all. I agree that rationalist oversimplify, and think that is basically because they already hold utilitarianism as a fundamental axiom. That said, I think the objective of being "less wrong" is a pretty good one. I'm not sure what humanity is left with if we give up on truth or accuracy a mutual objective of discussion.
- dullcrisp 3y ago
  I apologize for getting slightly mystical here, but I think of humanity as a vast consciousness, learning and growing and reasoning and evolving. We’re tiny aspects of that consciousness. We observe, develop ideas, bounce them off each other, deliberate, and eventually some take hold and spread, changing how mankind collectively sees the world. It’s not enough to just share information with each other, and lately the internet has made that increasingly less necessary. We need to test our ideas, subject them to collective scrutiny, and try to spread or adapt them in response to those of others. There aren’t always great forums to do that in, but I think it’s worthwhile in principle.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

I think we see eye-to eye on a couple things, and disagree on others. I agree most people's core values only shift slowly over time. However, most topics of discussion or debate are not about core values themselves. they are about loosely related topics bound by layers of assumptions and beliefs. This is where information sharing is important, and fundamental to learning. I don't know that anyone can find truth without a process of learning. On the other-hand, I don't see collective decision making and persuasion as a route to truth or learning at all. I agree that rationalist oversimplify, and think that is basically because they already hold utilitarianism as a fundamental axiom. That said, I think the objective of being "less wrong" is a pretty good one. I'm not sure what humanity is left with if we give up on truth or accuracy a mutual objective of discussion.

dullcrisp 3y ago
I apologize for getting slightly mystical here, but I think of humanity as a vast consciousness, learning and growing and reasoning and evolving. We’re tiny aspects of that consciousness. We observe, develop ideas, bounce them off each other, deliberate, and eventually some take hold and spread, changing how mankind collectively sees the world. It’s not enough to just share information with each other, and lately the internet has made that increasingly less necessary. We need to test our ideas, subject them to collective scrutiny, and try to spread or adapt them in response to those of others. There aren’t always great forums to do that in, but I think it’s worthwhile in principle.