I want to write a post about an… emotion, or pattern of looking at the world, that I have found rather harmful to my rationality in the past. The closest thing I’ve found is ‘indignation’, defined at Wiktionary as “An anger aroused by something perceived as an indignity, notably an offense or injustice.” The thing is, I wouldn’t consider the emotion I feel to be ‘anger’. It’s more like ‘the feeling of injustice’ in its own right, without the anger part. Frustration, maybe. Is there a word that means ‘frustration aroused by a perceived indignity, notably an offense or injustice’? Like, perhaps the emotion you may feel when you think about how pretty much no one in the world or no one you talk to seems to care about existential risks. Not that you should feel the emotion, or whatever it is, that I’m trying to describe—in the post I’ll argue that you should try not to—but perhaps there is a name for it? Anyone have any ideas? Should I just use ‘indignation’ and then define what I mean in the first few sentences? Should I use ‘adjective indignation’? If so, which adjective? Thanks for any input.
The words righteous indignation in combination are sufficiently well-recognized as to have their own wikipedia page. The page also says that righteous indignation has overtones of religiosity, which seems like a reason not to use it in your sense . It also says that it is akin to a “sense of injustice,” but at least for me, that phrase doesn’t have as much resonance.
which seems like a reason not to use it in your sense.
Strikes me as exactly the reason you should use it. What you are describing is indignation, it is righteous, and it is counterproductive in both rationalists and less rational folks for pretty much the same reasons.
I meant that the religious connotations might not be a reason to use the term if Will is trying to come up with the most accurate term for what he’s describing. To the extent the term is tied up in Christianity, it may not convey meaning in the way Will wants – although the more Will explains how he is using the term, the less problematic this would be. And I agree that what you say suggests an interesting way that Will can appropriate a religious term and make some interesting compare-and-contrast type points.
I noticed this emotion cropping up a lot when I read Reddit, and stopped reading it for that reason. It’s too easy to, for example, feel outraged over a video of police brutality, but not notice that it was years ago and in another state and already resolved.
It seems to be a pretty common and easily corrected failure mode. Maybe you could write a post about it? I’m sure you have lots of useful cached thoughts on the matter.
I, personally, see it as one of the emotional capacities of a healthy person. Kind of like lust. It can be misused, it can be a big time-waster if you let it occupy your whole life, but it’s basically a sign that you have enough energy. If it goes away altogether, something may be wrong.
I had a period a few years ago of something like anhedonia. The thing is, I also couldn’t experience righteous indignation, or nervous worry, or ordinary irritability. It was incredibly satisfying to get them back. I’m not a psychologist at all, but I think of joy, anger, and worry (and lust) as emotions that require energy. The miserably lethargic can’t manage them.
So that’s my interpretation and very modest defense of righteous indignation. It’s not a very practical emotion, but it is a way of engaging personally with the world. It motivates you in the minimal way of making you awake, alert, and focused on something. The absence of such engagement is pretty horrible.
Interestingly enough, this sounds like the emotion that (finally) induced me to overcome akrasia and write a post on LW for the first time, which initiated what has thus far been my greatest period of development as a rationalist.
It’s almost as if this feeling is to me what plain anger is to Harry Potter(-Evans-Verres): something which makes everything seem suddenly clearer.
It just goes to show how difficult the art of rationality is: the same technique that helps one person may hinder another.
Should I just use ‘indignation’ and then define what I mean in the first few sentences?
That could work well when backed up by with the description of just what you will be using the term to mean.
I will be interested to read your post—from your brief introduction here I think I have had similar observations about emotions that interfere with thought, independent of raw overwhelm from primitives like anger.
I’ve seen “moral indignation,” which might fit (though I think
“indignation” still implies anger). I’ve also heard people who feel
that way describe the object of their feelings as “disgusting” or
“offensive,” so you could call it “disgust” or “being offended.” Of
course, those people also seemed angry. Maybe the non-angry version
would be called “bitterness.”
As soon as I wrote the paragraph above, I felt sure that I’d heard
“moral disgust” before. I googled it and the second link was
this.
I don’t know about the quality of the study, but you could use the term.
In myself, I have labeled the rationality blocking emotion/behavior
as defensiveness. When I am feeling defensive, I am less willing to
see the world as it is. I bind myself to my context and it is very
difficult for me to reach out and establish connections to others.
I am also interested in ideas related to rationality and the human
condition. Not just about the biases that arise from our nature, but
about approaches to rationality that work from within our human
nature.
I have started an analysis of Buddhism from this perspective. At its
core (ignoring the obvious mysticism), I see sort of a how-to guide
for managing the human condition. If we are to be rational we need
to be willing to see the world as it is, not as we want it to be.
Pardon the self-promotion, but that sounds like the feeling of recognizing a SAMEL, i.e. that there is some otherwise-ungrounded inherent deservedness of something in the world.
(SAMEL = subjuctive acausal means-end link, elaborated in article)
I want to write a post about an… emotion, or pattern of looking at the world, that I have found rather harmful to my rationality in the past. The closest thing I’ve found is ‘indignation’, defined at Wiktionary as “An anger aroused by something perceived as an indignity, notably an offense or injustice.” The thing is, I wouldn’t consider the emotion I feel to be ‘anger’. It’s more like ‘the feeling of injustice’ in its own right, without the anger part. Frustration, maybe. Is there a word that means ‘frustration aroused by a perceived indignity, notably an offense or injustice’? Like, perhaps the emotion you may feel when you think about how pretty much no one in the world or no one you talk to seems to care about existential risks. Not that you should feel the emotion, or whatever it is, that I’m trying to describe—in the post I’ll argue that you should try not to—but perhaps there is a name for it? Anyone have any ideas? Should I just use ‘indignation’ and then define what I mean in the first few sentences? Should I use ‘adjective indignation’? If so, which adjective? Thanks for any input.
The words righteous indignation in combination are sufficiently well-recognized as to have their own wikipedia page. The page also says that righteous indignation has overtones of religiosity, which seems like a reason not to use it in your sense . It also says that it is akin to a “sense of injustice,” but at least for me, that phrase doesn’t have as much resonance.
Edited to add this possibly relevant/interesting link I came across, where David Brin describes self-righteous indignation as addictive.
Strikes me as exactly the reason you should use it. What you are describing is indignation, it is righteous, and it is counterproductive in both rationalists and less rational folks for pretty much the same reasons.
I meant that the religious connotations might not be a reason to use the term if Will is trying to come up with the most accurate term for what he’s describing. To the extent the term is tied up in Christianity, it may not convey meaning in the way Will wants – although the more Will explains how he is using the term, the less problematic this would be. And I agree that what you say suggests an interesting way that Will can appropriate a religious term and make some interesting compare-and-contrast type points.
I noticed this emotion cropping up a lot when I read Reddit, and stopped reading it for that reason. It’s too easy to, for example, feel outraged over a video of police brutality, but not notice that it was years ago and in another state and already resolved.
Sounds related to the failure class I call “living in the should-universe”.
It seems to be a pretty common and easily corrected failure mode. Maybe you could write a post about it? I’m sure you have lots of useful cached thoughts on the matter.
Added: Ah, I’d thought you’d just talked about it at LW meetups, but a Google search reveals that the theme is also in Above-Average AI Scientists and Points of Departure.
Righteous indignation is a good word for it.
I, personally, see it as one of the emotional capacities of a healthy person. Kind of like lust. It can be misused, it can be a big time-waster if you let it occupy your whole life, but it’s basically a sign that you have enough energy. If it goes away altogether, something may be wrong.
I had a period a few years ago of something like anhedonia. The thing is, I also couldn’t experience righteous indignation, or nervous worry, or ordinary irritability. It was incredibly satisfying to get them back. I’m not a psychologist at all, but I think of joy, anger, and worry (and lust) as emotions that require energy. The miserably lethargic can’t manage them.
So that’s my interpretation and very modest defense of righteous indignation. It’s not a very practical emotion, but it is a way of engaging personally with the world. It motivates you in the minimal way of making you awake, alert, and focused on something. The absence of such engagement is pretty horrible.
Interestingly enough, this sounds like the emotion that (finally) induced me to overcome akrasia and write a post on LW for the first time, which initiated what has thus far been my greatest period of development as a rationalist.
It’s almost as if this feeling is to me what plain anger is to Harry Potter(-Evans-Verres): something which makes everything seem suddenly clearer.
It just goes to show how difficult the art of rationality is: the same technique that helps one person may hinder another.
That could work well when backed up by with the description of just what you will be using the term to mean.
I will be interested to read your post—from your brief introduction here I think I have had similar observations about emotions that interfere with thought, independent of raw overwhelm from primitives like anger.
I’ve seen “moral indignation,” which might fit (though I think “indignation” still implies anger). I’ve also heard people who feel that way describe the object of their feelings as “disgusting” or “offensive,” so you could call it “disgust” or “being offended.” Of course, those people also seemed angry. Maybe the non-angry version would be called “bitterness.”
As soon as I wrote the paragraph above, I felt sure that I’d heard “moral disgust” before. I googled it and the second link was this. I don’t know about the quality of the study, but you could use the term.
In myself, I have labeled the rationality blocking emotion/behavior as defensiveness. When I am feeling defensive, I am less willing to see the world as it is. I bind myself to my context and it is very difficult for me to reach out and establish connections to others.
I am also interested in ideas related to rationality and the human condition. Not just about the biases that arise from our nature, but about approaches to rationality that work from within our human nature.
I have started an analysis of Buddhism from this perspective. At its core (ignoring the obvious mysticism), I see sort of a how-to guide for managing the human condition. If we are to be rational we need to be willing to see the world as it is, not as we want it to be.
outrage?
Pardon the self-promotion, but that sounds like the feeling of recognizing a SAMEL, i.e. that there is some otherwise-ungrounded inherent deservedness of something in the world.
(SAMEL = subjuctive acausal means-end link, elaborated in article)