So I guess the “save the world” part should get dropped then. Entirely.
Upon further reflection, it seems like a lot of people are already trying to do that (biomedical research, environmental causes, various anti-poverty charities, etc).
So now the question is “How do you teach rationality to people in a way that helps them do what they’re doing in a no-strings attached way such that they actually use the information to improve”. People still do whatever they were choosing to do, just more effectively.
The kind of rationality we’re investigating is inextricably bound to improvement; if it’s being transmitted effectively, we don’t need to attach extra semantic content to it to get people to adopt better practices, look at the future through critical rather than ideological eyes, et cetera. I’d actually strongly advise against attaching that sort of content; doing that would implicitly carry the message that rationality is tribal, like Lysenkoism or intelligent design.
This is true, at least, for improving in terms of habits of thought; improvement in habits of action has to do with instrumental rationality, and hasn’t received much attention here. That does seem to be changing, though.
So I guess the “save the world” part should get dropped then. Entirely.
Upon further reflection, it seems like a lot of people are already trying to do that (biomedical research, environmental causes, various anti-poverty charities, etc).
So now the question is “How do you teach rationality to people in a way that helps them do what they’re doing in a no-strings attached way such that they actually use the information to improve”. People still do whatever they were choosing to do, just more effectively.
Would that work better?
The kind of rationality we’re investigating is inextricably bound to improvement; if it’s being transmitted effectively, we don’t need to attach extra semantic content to it to get people to adopt better practices, look at the future through critical rather than ideological eyes, et cetera. I’d actually strongly advise against attaching that sort of content; doing that would implicitly carry the message that rationality is tribal, like Lysenkoism or intelligent design.
This is true, at least, for improving in terms of habits of thought; improvement in habits of action has to do with instrumental rationality, and hasn’t received much attention here. That does seem to be changing, though.
Er, there seems to have been miscommunication.
I’m not suggesting adding semantic content, I’m asking how you transmit rationality effectively.