[List] Ideas during Analysing Lies 1
Date: 2020-08-12-
why would it be important to be impressive but to not aim to be impressive?
- analysing lies redux
- explanation + bg on what I’ve watched
- plan: X hrs a day, do both analysis then comparisons
-
log my unfinished topics - finish them
- reflections on learning FI
- challenge notion of self
- can’t predict problems or pace; if it wasn’t surprising/confronting/causing idea-conflicts you wouldn’t be learning
- what topics could work well to help ppl getting in to FI
- write posts (as exercises) about fallibleideas.github.io
-
add list of unresolved conflicts and track them - get them resolved (tutorial 26 examples; learning and errors; another one…)
-
how can you go about learning?
-
how can you actually be impressive instead of looking impressive?
-
what’s the difference between debating as a debater, and debating as a thinker?
- reconsider instantaneous goals
- i.e. instantaneous priorities
- change “why did I write this?” to “why should I write this?”
- i.e. instantaneous priorities
-
practice writing digests of what I learn; post those to site, maybe weekly update to FI?
- write post about writing style and how it can be dishonest; simpler is better
- here’s an old example: XXXXX (e.g. IBDD popper’s criterion)
- speaking simply makes hiding lies harder.
- speaker can’t put in the same sort of social signals. it’s harder to tell people what to think with simple language.
- simple language is also easier to read and understand. if you can write complex ideas in simple language, that’s a virtue. it makes it easier to spread good ideas, and it makes the writing more enduring.
- (from AnalyzingLies1; ET) 32:07 where you’re supposed to use bold and simple writing. and make your stuff easy to criticise. (not fancy and confusing)
- thoughts on quoting people like goldratt: status, context, synchronicity
- context, post about “intellectual response time doens’t matter; a novel interpretation of the tortise and the hare as a metaphor for attitudes towards thinking and learning.
- quote goldratt: “I’m a bodybuilder”
- context, post about “intellectual response time doens’t matter; a novel interpretation of the tortise and the hare as a metaphor for attitudes towards thinking and learning.
-
how to symbols and our ideas about our self interact?
- why would rules like always saying “i think” before sentences mean when explaining an idea?
- meaningless, it’s sort of implied anyway
- but also not saying it is (at least sometimes) explicitly removing the “it’s just my opinion” excuse - you’re making a claim about reality by doing that, and reality doesn’t care about your opinion.
- so to refuse to not add “i think” means (at least in part) that you’re refusing to take “it’s just my opinion” off the table as a means to end the discussion irrationally. why would someone do that? well one reason is because they want the excuse there b/c they know they’ll need it.
-
how would grouping symbols change written english? (if we integrated something with a function like parens in maths / programming)
- have a script / flow chart for resolving paths forward style stuff (where the other person has different ideas). you can add stuff like “do I spot a problem with meta / social stuff? yes -> raise that I have a problem, ask if they have methodology to resolve such issues. do they? no -> paths forward, yes -> try that. did it work? no -> paths forward, yes -> leart a new way to resolve conflicts maybe, maybe resolved by luck, either way you can move on and maybe take extra ideas w/ you (okay it’s a long shot).
- you can also say to the person (btw I have a methodology for asking about methodolgies, it’s here if you want to check it out or skip ahead)
- if the person looks at the flow chart and can move to the bit that’s appropriate then it saves dialog time
- don’t tell a story (“i was reading blah and thought blah”), tell the idea (“what if blah causes blah? I think it could because blah. Here’s an example: blah”)
August 13th
- what is fallible ideas?
- community + living tradition of critical fallibilism
- what is the relationship between critical rationalism and critical fallibilism. What are some differences?
- important disagreements exist
- thoughts on conflict between learning and error rate
- doing time limited challenges increases error rate but can be useful for learning quickly
- what’s going on here?
- the more I learn the more intuitive it is to me that powering-up is a priority.
- doing time limited challenges increases error rate but can be useful for learning quickly
-
why would wanting to be remembered as someone who contributed to a good future be good?
-
why would wanting to be remembered as someone who contributed to a good future be second handed?
-
why would wanting to be remembered as someone who contributed to a good future be bad?
-
AL1: the prioritization of academic politicking indicates Birner thinks success as a philosopher depends on success in academia, which is wrong.
-
AL1: it’s curious how much i read into both the title and the ellipsis. if they were put there by the guy who posted (need to check source) it shows how much i take good quoting for granted. if it wasn’t CR i think i would have been more sceptical of the quoting quality.
-
why did overreaching stuff / coming to terms with own problems feel ~confessional before but doesn’t now?
- songs to analyse
- santa clause is coming to town (TCS / lying to children)
- call me maybe
- you need to calm down (taylor swift)
- blank space (taylor swift)
- sk8er boi
- standard nomenclature for FI posts about flagging stuff you
- overreaching - label for full post
- social signal / social dynamics / static meme - for particular statements or sentences; jokes, all jokes?
- not all jokes; e.g. “a preposition is fine to end a sentence with”
- self grading of quality
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.