I dutifully tried to say “aspiring rationalist” for awhile, but in addition to the syllable count thing just being too much of a pain, it… feels like it’s solving the wrong problem.
An argument that persuaded me to stop caring about it as much: communities of guitarists don’t call themselves “aspiring guitarists”. You’re either doing guitaring, or you’re not. (in some sense similar for being a scientist or researcher).
Meanwhile, I know at least some people definitely meet any reasonable bar for “actually a goddamn rationalist”. If you intentionally reflect on and direct your cognitive patterns in ways that are more likely to find true beliefs and accomplish your goals, and you’ve gone off into the world and solved some difficult problems that depended on you being able to do that… I think you’re just plain a rationalist.
I think I myself am right around the threshold where I think it might reasonably make sense to call myself a rationalist. Reasonable people might disagree. I think 10 years ago I was definitely more like “a subculture supporting character.” I think Logan Strohl and Jim Babcock and Eliezer Yudkowsky and Elizabeth van Nostrand and Oliver Habryka each have some clear “actually the sort of rationalist you might want to pay money to do rationality at professional rates” thing going on. It’d feel dumb to me for them to go out of their way to tack-on “aspiring” (even if, of course, there are a ton more skills they could learn or improve at)
I guess you do sometimes have “students” vs “grad students” vs “doctors” of various stripes. You probably don’t call yourself a scientist while you’re still getting your biology degree. But even a 2nd year undergrad biology major is doing something that someone who retweets “I fucking love science” memes is not. A guy who knows 5 chords on guitar and can play a few songs is in some sense straightforwardly a “guitarist”, in a way that a guy who hangs out in the guitar club but doesn’t play is not. Could he be better at guitar? Sure, and so could the professional guitarist who can improvise an entire song.
I agree there’s a problem where rationalism feels prone to “being a subculture”, and there is a need to guard against that somehow. But I don’t think the “aspiring” thing is the way to go about it.
I love your observations here. The quality of grounding in a clear intuition here.
I don’t think you can avoid the subculture thing. The discipline doesn’t exist in a void the way math kind of does. Unless & until you can actually define the practice of rationality, there’s no clear dividing line between the social scene and the set of people who practice the discipline. No clear analogue to “actually playing a guitar”.
Like, I think I follow your intuition, but consider:
Meanwhile, I know at least some people definitely meet any reasonable bar for “actually a goddamn rationalist”. If you intentionally reflect on and direct your cognitive patterns in ways that are more likely to find true beliefs and accomplish your goals, and you’ve gone off into the world and solved some difficult problems that depended on you being able to do that… I think you’re just plain a rationalist.
I’m reasonably sure a lot of people here would consider me a great example of a non-rationalist. Lots of folk told me that to my face while I worked at CFAR. But the above describes me to an utter T. I’m just doing it in a way that the culture here doesn’t approve of and thinks is pretty nutty. Which is fine. I think the culture here is doing its “truth-seeking” in a pretty nutty way too. Y’all are getting great results predicting Covid case numbers, and I’m getting great results guiding people to cure their social anxiety and depression. To each their own.
I think what you’re talking about is way, way more of an aesthetic than you might realize. Like, what are you really using to detect who is and isn’t “actually a goddamn rationalist”? My guess is it’s more of a gut sense that you then try to examine upon reflection.
Is Elon Musk “actually a goddamn rationalist”? He sure seems to care about what’s true and about being effective in the world. But I’m guessing he somehow lands as less of a central example than Oli or Eliezer do. If so, why?
If Elon doesn’t do it for you, insert some other successful smart person who mysteriously doesn’t gut-ping as “actually a goddamn rationalist”.
If I’m way off here, I’d actually be pretty interested in knowing that. Because I’d find that illuminating as to what you mean by rationalism.
But if I’m basically right, then you’re not going to separate the discipline from the social scene with a term. You’ll keep seeing social status and perception of skill conflated. Not exactly overlapping, but muddled nonetheless.
I dutifully tried to say “aspiring rationalist” for awhile, but in addition to the syllable count thing just being too much of a pain, it… feels like it’s solving the wrong problem.
An argument that persuaded me to stop caring about it as much: communities of guitarists don’t call themselves “aspiring guitarists”. You’re either doing guitaring, or you’re not. (in some sense similar for being a scientist or researcher).
Meanwhile, I know at least some people definitely meet any reasonable bar for “actually a goddamn rationalist”. If you intentionally reflect on and direct your cognitive patterns in ways that are more likely to find true beliefs and accomplish your goals, and you’ve gone off into the world and solved some difficult problems that depended on you being able to do that… I think you’re just plain a rationalist.
I think I myself am right around the threshold where I think it might reasonably make sense to call myself a rationalist. Reasonable people might disagree. I think 10 years ago I was definitely more like “a subculture supporting character.” I think Logan Strohl and Jim Babcock and Eliezer Yudkowsky and Elizabeth van Nostrand and Oliver Habryka each have some clear “actually the sort of rationalist you might want to pay money to do rationality at professional rates” thing going on. It’d feel dumb to me for them to go out of their way to tack-on “aspiring” (even if, of course, there are a ton more skills they could learn or improve at)
I guess you do sometimes have “students” vs “grad students” vs “doctors” of various stripes. You probably don’t call yourself a scientist while you’re still getting your biology degree. But even a 2nd year undergrad biology major is doing something that someone who retweets “I fucking love science” memes is not. A guy who knows 5 chords on guitar and can play a few songs is in some sense straightforwardly a “guitarist”, in a way that a guy who hangs out in the guitar club but doesn’t play is not. Could he be better at guitar? Sure, and so could the professional guitarist who can improvise an entire song.
I agree there’s a problem where rationalism feels prone to “being a subculture”, and there is a need to guard against that somehow. But I don’t think the “aspiring” thing is the way to go about it.
I love your observations here. The quality of grounding in a clear intuition here.
I don’t think you can avoid the subculture thing. The discipline doesn’t exist in a void the way math kind of does. Unless & until you can actually define the practice of rationality, there’s no clear dividing line between the social scene and the set of people who practice the discipline. No clear analogue to “actually playing a guitar”.
Like, I think I follow your intuition, but consider:
I’m reasonably sure a lot of people here would consider me a great example of a non-rationalist. Lots of folk told me that to my face while I worked at CFAR. But the above describes me to an utter T. I’m just doing it in a way that the culture here doesn’t approve of and thinks is pretty nutty. Which is fine. I think the culture here is doing its “truth-seeking” in a pretty nutty way too. Y’all are getting great results predicting Covid case numbers, and I’m getting great results guiding people to cure their social anxiety and depression. To each their own.
I think what you’re talking about is way, way more of an aesthetic than you might realize. Like, what are you really using to detect who is and isn’t “actually a goddamn rationalist”? My guess is it’s more of a gut sense that you then try to examine upon reflection.
Is Elon Musk “actually a goddamn rationalist”? He sure seems to care about what’s true and about being effective in the world. But I’m guessing he somehow lands as less of a central example than Oli or Eliezer do. If so, why?
If Elon doesn’t do it for you, insert some other successful smart person who mysteriously doesn’t gut-ping as “actually a goddamn rationalist”.
If I’m way off here, I’d actually be pretty interested in knowing that. Because I’d find that illuminating as to what you mean by rationalism.
But if I’m basically right, then you’re not going to separate the discipline from the social scene with a term. You’ll keep seeing social status and perception of skill conflated. Not exactly overlapping, but muddled nonetheless.