Comments on: All Debates Are Bravery Debates

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:29:56 +0000

HOLY SHIT, YOU WROTE THE NON-LIBERTARIAN FAQ??

I cannot believe I did not know that. I read that thing! It’s great!

(Now that I look at it again, I see your name is not even on it. So I don’t have to blame myself for failing to recognize the name. Now I can blame you )

Report comment

By: Luke Somers

Luke Somers — Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:47:38 +0000

Another thing Landmark emphasized – big time – was ‘Story’ – we all make stuff up to fill in the gaps in our knowledge, and that’s OK… but it’s much better if you remember which stuff you made up so you treat it like a story you made up instead of fact.

That’s another antidote to blaming yourself for things out of your control. Yes, take responsibility, but don’t beat yourself up over tenuous connections that may not even exist.

Report comment

By: da55id

da55id — Thu, 15 May 2014 17:13:52 +0000

Your experience in cost vs output $ ratios is similar to the fuel expended in a heavy 3 stage rocket to get a lightweight payload to orbit. The social, economic and educational “distances” are similar so it is not a surprise that it costs so much to deliver a “payload” to such an unlikely place. In other words – it was money well spent. Having identified the inefficiency ratio, one could work on optimizations. That is what missionaries are from an economic standpoint.

Report comment

By: myriad ways

myriad ways — Mon, 30 Dec 2013 08:52:59 +0000

I think the beef with “low-income housing” isn’t with people being able to live near where they work – it’s with things like “the projects”, big subsidized apartment blocks that somewhat resemble Terrafoam in purpose and texture, warehousing, etc. My suspicion is that it’s more useful to everyone involved if poorer families can live next to middle-class and higher families (though forcing the ultrarich into such places is probably a lost cause) so their kids can mingle, and stuff like that. This is called mixed-income development.

Report comment

By: Dan

Dan — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 21:58:45 +0000

This post basically boils down to “Most problems, when framed as calibration problems, are difficult to solve even in theory”.

No shit, Sherlock.

Report comment

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:59:02 +0000

But by the same token, if you *are* getting to repeat the message frequently (e.g. the audience is your kids, spouse, or subordinates), exaggerating will pull them too far in the direction of the message.

Report comment

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:54:18 +0000

I guess this can be explained by the cognitive bias called Bayesian conservatism. People tend to underweight newer evidence, and repeating it won’t work unless you can get away with sockpuppetry, so the solution is to exaggerate it.

The other day in League of Legends, I was playing AD carry, and before the game, the support (a teammate I’d be working closely with) said she was new to her role and her character’s abilities, and asked how to play them. So I knew not to expect much from her. But I performed much better than usual, especially in the early game, even though her performance made it clear she *wasn’t* new. (She admitted late in the game that she’d been trying to scare another teammate into backing out.) That was when I realized I’d been holding myself back by expecting too *much* help from my teammates (which, for various reasons, would have been more justifiable when I was first learning the game).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_(Bayesian)

Report comment

By: Michael Dickens

Michael Dickens — Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:47:15 +0000

Regarding the Landmark Forum/self-help book example, I think there’s a large difference between the types of things that are “your fault” according to Landmark, and the types of things that are “not your fault” according to self-help books. Your parents getting divorced or your friend committing suicide is not your fault; not getting your work done on time or people thinking you smell bad is your fault.

In short, things are your fault if, by their being your fault, you have a good chance of fixing them.

Report comment

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:50:36 +0000

The idea of different sides coming from different cultures was very valuable to me, and it clears up many debates that seem oppositional but aren’t (legalizing marijuana, feminism vs men’s rights, welfare, affirmative action), but it didn’t help me to understand the biggest social debates any better.

For example, I can’t think of a middle ground between gay rights groups and anti-gay groups that both sides can agree on. Can anyone else find such a middle ground, or figure out what the culture disagreement is?

Report comment

By: Michael Dickens

Michael Dickens — Sun, 08 Sep 2013 16:20:29 +0000

Another example: Typical Mind/”you’re perfectly normal”. Sometimes people need to be reminded that not everyone’s mind works just like theirs. But other times, people think their behavior is really weird and feel ashamed about it (I think a lot of people feel this way about masturbation), even though the behavior is typical.

Report comment