FANDOM


This is meant to outline and link to a series of tutorials on the subject of rationality. It will cover more breadth and depth than my current page on Thinking Skills.

Stuff in non-final order for now:

Part 0, (Optional) Why this is a thing:

Part 1, Working on our Knowledge:

Part 2, Thinking of what to do, Problem Solving, etc.:

  • Means-Ends Chains
  • Goal Oriented Strategy (far end of chain)
  • Opportunity Oriented Strategy (near end of chain)
  • knowledge, expertise is important
  • "brainstorming" all possible forms of solution (refer to "variables" in critical thinking)
  • hybridizing the two strategies
  • Paved with good intentions

Part 3, Changing Minds (the right ways):

  • communication, what can and can't be communicated
  • the science
  • my method:
    • how I think mind-changing works
    • need everyone on as much of the same epistemology as possible
      • helping other people excel at rationality (like teaching them this guide, how to figure out what is true, how to problem solve and plan, and how to changing others minds)
    • need everyone on common semantics
    • need everyone to be able to articulate each others positions deeply
    • need to understand the values and psychology involved
    • explore for the underlying or core points
    • use thorough Bayesian Reasoning on those points (finding and using all the relevant facts and logic)
    • re-reading your own replies, compare it to what you are responding to, look for logical ways of avoiding your own criticism
    • Steelmanning, balancing hardcore logic with charitable lenience (to intuition, correctable errors etc.)
    • repeat the process if necessary.  Never stop the steps of understanding each other, or else it will derail
  • spectrums: highly certain to highly speculative, highly obvious to highly expertise-intensive (and in easier less-risky situations you can get away with less intense methodology)

Part 4, Changing Minds (the wrong ways):

  • methods that shouldn't work
  • the social aspects of disagreement
  • the meta conflict, conflicting theories of how to handle conflict:
    • propagandists
    • "post-rationalists"
    • stagnant conflict avoiders
    • abusiveness
    • dogmatists
    • assumption stacking (VS exploration)
  • posers, "just asking questions", fake or manipulative rationalism
  • how we should handle all of the above and related issues
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.