but I think rationalists would benefit from more understanding of what purpose higher levels serve
I don’t buy it, I think tons of great rationalists fully understand why people use language for coordination rather than for matching up with reality.
My first thought for the skills for rationalist folk to get better at are (a) code-switching, i.e. realizing when someone’s acting on a different level and being able to interface with them on that level, and (b) being able to enter an environment where people are primarily focused on higher simulacra levels, not go crazy, be sane when you come home, yet still be able to fight and win in that environment (without saying things that are false).
I think a substantial fraction of LWers have the (usually implicit—they may not have even read about simulacra) belief that higher levels are inherently morally problematic, and that engaging on those levels about an important topic is at best excusable under the kind of adversarial circumstances where direct lies are excusable. (There’s the obvious selection effect where people who feel gross about higher levels feel more comfortable on LW than almost anywhere else.)
I think there need to be better public arguments against that viewpoint, not least because I’m not fully convinced it’s wrong.
I don’t buy it, I think tons of great rationalists fully understand why people use language for coordination rather than for matching up with reality.
My first thought for the skills for rationalist folk to get better at are (a) code-switching, i.e. realizing when someone’s acting on a different level and being able to interface with them on that level, and (b) being able to enter an environment where people are primarily focused on higher simulacra levels, not go crazy, be sane when you come home, yet still be able to fight and win in that environment (without saying things that are false).
I think a substantial fraction of LWers have the (usually implicit—they may not have even read about simulacra) belief that higher levels are inherently morally problematic, and that engaging on those levels about an important topic is at best excusable under the kind of adversarial circumstances where direct lies are excusable. (There’s the obvious selection effect where people who feel gross about higher levels feel more comfortable on LW than almost anywhere else.)
I think there need to be better public arguments against that viewpoint, not least because I’m not fully convinced it’s wrong.