This sounds a bit harsher than I really intend but… Self described rationalists and post rationalists could mostly use a solid course in something like Jonathan Baron’s Thinking and Deciding, ie obtaining a broad and basic grounding in practical epistemology in the first place.
It’s an academic textbook on rationality. It defines rationality as:
The best kind of thinking, which we shall call rational thinking, is whatever kind of thinking best helps people achieve their goals. If it should turn out that following the rules of formal logic leads to eternal happiness, then it is “rational thinking” to follow the laws of logic (assuming that we all want eternal happiness). If it should turn out, on the other hand, that carefully violating the laws of logic at every turn leads to eternal happiness, then it is these violations that we shall call “rational.”
When I argue that certain kinds of thinking are “most rational,” I mean that these help people achieve their goals. Such arguments could be wrong. If so, some other sort of thinking is most rational.
This sounds a bit harsher than I really intend but… Self described rationalists and post rationalists could mostly use a solid course in something like Jonathan Baron’s Thinking and Deciding, ie obtaining a broad and basic grounding in practical epistemology in the first place.
Is that a book?
I reviewed it on LW, almost 10 years ago now.
It’s an academic textbook on rationality. It defines rationality as: