I actually was not expecting the process to be “ask if they have the skill”, I was expecting the sequence to be:
get into an argument
notice it feels stuck
notice that your conversation partner seems stuck in a system
make some effort to convey that you’re trying to talk about a different system
say (some version of) “hey man, it looks like you don’t have the ‘step outside your current frame’ skill, and I don’t think the argument is worth having until you do.”
(well, that’s probably an unproductive way to go about it, but, I’m assuming the ‘notice they don’t have the skill’ part comes from observations while arguing rather than something you ask them and they tell you about.’)
say (some version of) “hey man, it looks like you don’t have the ‘step outside your current frame’ skill, and I don’t think the argument is worth having until you do.”
Maybe a more diplomatic way could be: “hey man, for the sake of thought experiment, could we for a moment consider this thing from a different frame?” They may agree or refuse, but probably won’t feel offended.
Something about this feels like what I used to do but don’t do now, and I realized what it is.
If they’re stuck I don’t see it as their problem, I see it as my problem that I can’t find a way to take my thing and make it sensible to them within their system, or at least find an entry point, since all systems are brittle and you just have to find the right thread to pull if you want to untangle it so they can move towards seeing things in ways beyond what their current worldview permits.
But maybe my response looks the same if I can’t figure it out and/or don’t feel like putting in the energy to do that, which is some version of “hey, looks like we just disagree in some fundamental way here I’m not interested in trying to resolve, sorry”, which I regret is kinda rude still and wish I could find a way to be less rude about.
I think I don’t feel too bad about “hey, looks like we just disagree in some fundamental way here I’m not interested in trying to resolve, sorry”. It might be rude in some circles but I think I’m willing to bite the bullet on “it’s pretty necessary for that to be an okay-move to pull on LW and in rationalist spaces.”
I think “we disagree in a fundamental way” isn’t quite accurate, and there’s a better version that’s something like “I think we’re thinking in pretty different frames/paradigms and I don’t think it makes sense to bridge that disconnect.”
A thing making it tricky (also relevant to Viliam’s comment) is that up until recently there wasn’t even a consensus that different-frames were a thing, that you might need to translate between.
I actually was not expecting the process to be “ask if they have the skill”, I was expecting the sequence to be:
get into an argument
notice it feels stuck
notice that your conversation partner seems stuck in a system
make some effort to convey that you’re trying to talk about a different system
say (some version of) “hey man, it looks like you don’t have the ‘step outside your current frame’ skill, and I don’t think the argument is worth having until you do.”
(well, that’s probably an unproductive way to go about it, but, I’m assuming the ‘notice they don’t have the skill’ part comes from observations while arguing rather than something you ask them and they tell you about.’)
Maybe a more diplomatic way could be: “hey man, for the sake of thought experiment, could we for a moment consider this thing from a different frame?” They may agree or refuse, but probably won’t feel offended.
Something about this feels like what I used to do but don’t do now, and I realized what it is.
If they’re stuck I don’t see it as their problem, I see it as my problem that I can’t find a way to take my thing and make it sensible to them within their system, or at least find an entry point, since all systems are brittle and you just have to find the right thread to pull if you want to untangle it so they can move towards seeing things in ways beyond what their current worldview permits.
But maybe my response looks the same if I can’t figure it out and/or don’t feel like putting in the energy to do that, which is some version of “hey, looks like we just disagree in some fundamental way here I’m not interested in trying to resolve, sorry”, which I regret is kinda rude still and wish I could find a way to be less rude about.
I think I don’t feel too bad about “hey, looks like we just disagree in some fundamental way here I’m not interested in trying to resolve, sorry”. It might be rude in some circles but I think I’m willing to bite the bullet on “it’s pretty necessary for that to be an okay-move to pull on LW and in rationalist spaces.”
I think “we disagree in a fundamental way” isn’t quite accurate, and there’s a better version that’s something like “I think we’re thinking in pretty different frames/paradigms and I don’t think it makes sense to bridge that disconnect.”
A thing making it tricky (also relevant to Viliam’s comment) is that up until recently there wasn’t even a consensus that different-frames were a thing, that you might need to translate between.