That’s really insightful. Lately I have been getting into a few more debates, religious and not, because of decreased tolerance to flawed ideas. I got stuck on “That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.” loop, convinced I was right in a discussion with my mother, actually.
Still trying to figure out how to become more truth-seeking, but it’s hard since I’m not nearly rational enough. I wonder what the best way to act is, if I don’t want debates, or discussions, but feel compelled to give a hint at my own opinions. For example, a friend thought the best way to make things better was to pray for me, which sparked a pretty heated argument, something I didn’t want.
I’ll just try to get my head out of my arse, but I still find it frustrating how obviously wrong people (including me) can be.
What sequence would you recommend if I repeatedly approach this from the wrong angle?
The Reductionism Sequence has been the most important for me, in terms of how I would assess its impact on my mental processes. In particular, I think it helps you see what other people are doing wrong, so that you can respond to their errors in a non-confrontational manner. Spending a lot of time essentially meditating on the concepts underlying dissolving the question has really changed how I see things and how I deal with disagreements with other people.
I’m not claiming to be some paragon of perfect rationality here, I still lose my patience sometimes, but it’s a process.
An attempt to be more rational, then? Thanks, I think I need to reread that, anyway. That and a few others. It’ll require some work, sure, but few things in life are easy. It’s a start anyway, cheers! Think I’ll do a bit better in… A few weeks, once I’ve mulled it over.
That’s really insightful. Lately I have been getting into a few more debates, religious and not, because of decreased tolerance to flawed ideas. I got stuck on “That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.” loop, convinced I was right in a discussion with my mother, actually.
Still trying to figure out how to become more truth-seeking, but it’s hard since I’m not nearly rational enough. I wonder what the best way to act is, if I don’t want debates, or discussions, but feel compelled to give a hint at my own opinions. For example, a friend thought the best way to make things better was to pray for me, which sparked a pretty heated argument, something I didn’t want.
I’ll just try to get my head out of my arse, but I still find it frustrating how obviously wrong people (including me) can be.
What sequence would you recommend if I repeatedly approach this from the wrong angle?
Does an external link work instead? Because I found Paul Graham’s essay Keep Your Identity Small to make the point a bit more succinctly.
Definitely helpful, much appreciated!
The Reductionism Sequence has been the most important for me, in terms of how I would assess its impact on my mental processes. In particular, I think it helps you see what other people are doing wrong, so that you can respond to their errors in a non-confrontational manner. Spending a lot of time essentially meditating on the concepts underlying dissolving the question has really changed how I see things and how I deal with disagreements with other people.
I’m not claiming to be some paragon of perfect rationality here, I still lose my patience sometimes, but it’s a process.
An attempt to be more rational, then? Thanks, I think I need to reread that, anyway. That and a few others. It’ll require some work, sure, but few things in life are easy. It’s a start anyway, cheers! Think I’ll do a bit better in… A few weeks, once I’ve mulled it over.