Ah ok. Yeah, this isn’t quite standard LW fare, but I don’t think it’s that far off. Also, my impression (from reading the Craft and Community sequence) is that LW was intended to be a place for a somewhat broader array of writing under the “rationalist” umbrella than “more stuff like the Sequences.”
It reminded me of “Professing and Cheering”—an anecdote from real life; expert’s opinion; a conclusion for aspiring rationalists.
As a data point: I liked it; it explained a thing that I suspected but never put into such clear words; and I would like to see more articles like this. And I think it is important for rationality, because religious apologetics is a millenia-old Dark Art, its frequency is high and its impact can be huge.
Make it two data points. I am really enjoiying your (Chris) posts. Besides the content (which I do think belongs to LW) I like the writing style a lot: the entries are long, but engaging.
Ah ok. Yeah, this isn’t quite standard LW fare, but I don’t think it’s that far off. Also, my impression (from reading the Craft and Community sequence) is that LW was intended to be a place for a somewhat broader array of writing under the “rationalist” umbrella than “more stuff like the Sequences.”
But Eliezer is welcome to correct me here.
It reminded me of “Professing and Cheering”—an anecdote from real life; expert’s opinion; a conclusion for aspiring rationalists.
As a data point: I liked it; it explained a thing that I suspected but never put into such clear words; and I would like to see more articles like this. And I think it is important for rationality, because religious apologetics is a millenia-old Dark Art, its frequency is high and its impact can be huge.
Make it two data points. I am really enjoiying your (Chris) posts. Besides the content (which I do think belongs to LW) I like the writing style a lot: the entries are long, but engaging.