knb, does your nephew know about lesswrong, rationality and the Singularity?
I guess I would have enjoyed reading such a website when I was a teenager.
When it comes to a physical book, Engines of Creation by Drexler can be a good way to introduce him to nanotechnology and what science can make happen. (I know that nanotech is far less important that FAI, but I think it is more “visual” : you can imagine those nanobots manufacturing stuff or curing diseases, while you cannot imagine a hard takeoff). Teenagers need dream.
My sister and brother-in-law are both semi-religious theists, so I’m a bit reluctant to introduce him to anything as hardcore-atheist as Less Wrong, at least right now. Going through that huge theist-to-atheist identity transition can be really traumatic. I think it would be better if he was a bit older before he had confront those ideas.
I was 16 before I really allowed myself to accept that I didn’t believe in God, and that was still a major crisis for me. If he starts getting into hardcore rationality material this early, I’m afraid it could force a choice between rationality and wishful thinking that he may not be ready to make.
If he is gifted and interested in science, introducing him to lesswrong, rationality and the Singularity could have a substantial positive impact on his academic development. What would be the worst that could happen?
My concern is not just that it would be traumatic, but that it will be so traumatic that he’ll rationalize himself into a “belief in belief” situation. I had my crisis of faith when I was close to his age (14) and I wasn’t ready to accept something that would alienate me from my family yet, so I simply told myself that I believed, and tried not to think about the issue. (I suspect this is why most people don’t come out as atheists until after they’ve established separate identities from their parents and families.
A lot of people never escape from these traps. I think waiting somewhat—until he’s somewhat older and more mature—will make him more likely to come to the right conclusions in the end.
I had rather the opposite experience—don’t recall ever really believing (though I went to Catholic elementary school and semi-regularly attended a church), and was shocked in 8th grade to find that people were really serious about that stuff. Ended up spending a lot of time pointlessly arguing.
If I understand correctly, your primary concern is that he may rationalise himself into this “belief in belief” situation, and that this will ultimately delay or deter completely his transition into atheism. Why do you think this? Have there been any studies done to support this notion?
I doubt the likelihood of learning about rationality and the Singularity inducing a crisis of faith is greater than that of most public science books.
How is the above wrong enough to be at −2? I nearly universally reject any assertions that people have a duty to interfere with others but even so I don’t have a problem with the above.
If I understand correctly, your primary concern is that he may rationalise himself into this “belief in belief” situation, and that this will ultimately delay or deter completely his transition into atheism?
“I suspect this is why most people don’t come out as atheists until after they’ve established separate identities from their parents and families.
A lot of people never escape from these traps.”—What evidence do you have for thinking this? I would think that challenging religious assumptions at a younger age would result in an earlier transition to Atheism (assuming one occurs).
More importantly, the risk of rationality and the Singularity inducing a crisis of faith is no greater than that of any science and math book. Visit the science section of any major bookstore and bam—Dawkins.
knb, does your nephew know about lesswrong, rationality and the Singularity? I guess I would have enjoyed reading such a website when I was a teenager.
When it comes to a physical book, Engines of Creation by Drexler can be a good way to introduce him to nanotechnology and what science can make happen. (I know that nanotech is far less important that FAI, but I think it is more “visual” : you can imagine those nanobots manufacturing stuff or curing diseases, while you cannot imagine a hard takeoff).
Teenagers need dream.
My sister and brother-in-law are both semi-religious theists, so I’m a bit reluctant to introduce him to anything as hardcore-atheist as Less Wrong, at least right now. Going through that huge theist-to-atheist identity transition can be really traumatic. I think it would be better if he was a bit older before he had confront those ideas.
I was 16 before I really allowed myself to accept that I didn’t believe in God, and that was still a major crisis for me. If he starts getting into hardcore rationality material this early, I’m afraid it could force a choice between rationality and wishful thinking that he may not be ready to make.
If he is gifted and interested in science, introducing him to lesswrong, rationality and the Singularity could have a substantial positive impact on his academic development. What would be the worst that could happen?
My concern is not just that it would be traumatic, but that it will be so traumatic that he’ll rationalize himself into a “belief in belief” situation. I had my crisis of faith when I was close to his age (14) and I wasn’t ready to accept something that would alienate me from my family yet, so I simply told myself that I believed, and tried not to think about the issue. (I suspect this is why most people don’t come out as atheists until after they’ve established separate identities from their parents and families.
A lot of people never escape from these traps. I think waiting somewhat—until he’s somewhat older and more mature—will make him more likely to come to the right conclusions in the end.
I had rather the opposite experience—don’t recall ever really believing (though I went to Catholic elementary school and semi-regularly attended a church), and was shocked in 8th grade to find that people were really serious about that stuff. Ended up spending a lot of time pointlessly arguing.
If I understand correctly, your primary concern is that he may rationalise himself into this “belief in belief” situation, and that this will ultimately delay or deter completely his transition into atheism. Why do you think this? Have there been any studies done to support this notion?
I doubt the likelihood of learning about rationality and the Singularity inducing a crisis of faith is greater than that of most public science books.
How is the above wrong enough to be at −2? I nearly universally reject any assertions that people have a duty to interfere with others but even so I don’t have a problem with the above.
“I nearly universally reject any assertions that people have a duty to interfere with others”
As do I, hence “almost”. I suppose I should edit the word out of my comment.
If I understand correctly, your primary concern is that he may rationalise himself into this “belief in belief” situation, and that this will ultimately delay or deter completely his transition into atheism?
“I suspect this is why most people don’t come out as atheists until after they’ve established separate identities from their parents and families.
A lot of people never escape from these traps.”—What evidence do you have for thinking this? I would think that challenging religious assumptions at a younger age would result in an earlier transition to Atheism (assuming one occurs).
More importantly, the risk of rationality and the Singularity inducing a crisis of faith is no greater than that of any science and math book. Visit the science section of any major bookstore and bam—Dawkins.