Notes | Tutorial 22
Date: 2020-08-03analysing max’s “debate”
- too many things at once
- not well explained
- gish gallop - win by overwhelming
- need to get standard rationality techniques on autopilot
- future debates:
- make a few points well
- object points, not meta
- keep it simple, not overly complex
- explain enough for ppl to learn (opposition or audience)
- explain enough that someone could give critical feedback
- keep claims to stuff i’m confident about or explicitly hedge
- keep it short
- organization structure simpler
- take time and make tree during discussion
- or tree after for analysis
- make a few points well
tree of debate and comment on debate
max debate tree (covid pandemic image; june 2020)
image: low deaths per population (0.005%) means there is no pandemic
max: is this satire?
[implied 'no' from alice]
max: 'satire is the most charitable interp'
implication: if you don't think it's satire then you have low standards for ideas
max going on the offensive
aside: posting low qual stuff erodes good points
alternative thing max could say: i disagree, do you want to debate/discuss?
alice: reasonable metric?
max: unclear response "like the data points aren't irrelevant or wrong"
Alice: i think 0.005% is a good point, why don't you like it?
max: because it has problems
[what problems do you think it has?] -- note Alice just said they thought it was good
max: avoiding giving answer ahead of time
max could have been more direct by saying "do you want to make any disclaimers"
alice: pandemic means prevalence
the metric (0.005%) means it's not prevalent
max [non sequitur] evading the thing, being unclear, etc
alice replies to get back on track
alice: this is what I thought the convo was
alice: is the metric is satire or low standard? [sic]
max: metric wouldn't have qualified as satire without image
max: trying to back alice into corner and set her up, max lacks skill
plus don't need to do that
alice: i think it has zero problems
alice: mild infection, supporting details
alice: i don't think it has problems
max: here's my list
list lacks explanation
alice: you're being pedantic, the point still stands
max's list
conclusion doesn't follow (not explained)
too many sig figs
no citations
number of deaths unrelated to pandemic status
alice: for a mild infection only mortality counts b/c other symptoms can be ignored
ignores proactive measures
for next session
- grammar stuff
- text analysis
- chapters of possible minds
- TCS material
You can leave a comment anonymously. No sign up or login is required. Use a junk email if not your own; email is only for notifications—though, FYI, I will be able to see it.
Comments powered by Talkyard.