On the other hand… man, sure seems scary to me that we still have so many major disagreements that we haven’t been able to resolve.
I think this post does a particularly exemplary job of exploring some subtle disagreements from a procedural level: I like that Holden makes a pretty significant attempt to pass Nate’s Ideological Turing Test, flags which parts of the post represent which person’s views, flags possible cruxes, and and explores what future efforts (both conceptual and empirical) might further resolve the disagreement.
It’s… possible this is actually the single best example of a public doublecrux writeup that I know of?
Anyways, thanks Holden and Nate for taking the time to do this, both for the object level progress and for serving as a great example.
It’s… possible this is actually the single best example of a public doublecrux writeup that I know of?
This sentence was confusing to me given that the post does not mention ‘double crux’, but I mentioned it to someone and they said to think of it as the mental motion and not the explicit format, and that makes more sense to me.
Curated. On one hand, folks sure have spent a long time trying to hash out longstanding disagreements, and I think it’s kinda reasonable to not feel like that’s a super valuable thing to do more of.
On the other hand… man, sure seems scary to me that we still have so many major disagreements that we haven’t been able to resolve.
I think this post does a particularly exemplary job of exploring some subtle disagreements from a procedural level: I like that Holden makes a pretty significant attempt to pass Nate’s Ideological Turing Test, flags which parts of the post represent which person’s views, flags possible cruxes, and and explores what future efforts (both conceptual and empirical) might further resolve the disagreement.
It’s… possible this is actually the single best example of a public doublecrux writeup that I know of?
Anyways, thanks Holden and Nate for taking the time to do this, both for the object level progress and for serving as a great example.
This sentence was confusing to me given that the post does not mention ‘double crux’, but I mentioned it to someone and they said to think of it as the mental motion and not the explicit format, and that makes more sense to me.
Yeah that’s what I intended.