Hi, I’ve been lurking for a while. I haven’t yet read most of the sequences, since I find the style not so much to my liking. I prefer textbooks, so I’ll probably go out and get the textbooks on this list or this one instead. I read somewhere on this site that Thinking and Deciding is pretty much the sequences in book form. I did read HP:MOR though—brilliant!
In the meantime, I’ve read a decent amount on LW-related subjects, including the following books on rationality:
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
Everything Is Obvious Once You Know the Answer by Duncan Watts
The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt
The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver
How to Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff
Thinking Statistically by Uri Bram
Another interest is futurism, on which I’ve read the following:
The Singularity Is Near by Ray Kurzweil
Abundance by Peter Diamandis
The Future by Al Gore
The New Digital Age by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen
Big Data by Victor Mayer-Schonberger
Approaching the Future by Ben Hammersley
Radical Abundance by Eric Drexler
I’m also very interested in positive psychology and behavioral change. Good books I’ve read on this include:
Flourish by Martin Seligman
Happiness by Ed Diener
The How of Happiness by Sonja Lyubomirsky
The Happiness Hypothesis by Jonathan Haidt
Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert
Pretty much everything by Gallup, especially the books by Tom Rath
The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg
Self-Directed Behavior by David Watson and Roland Tharp
Finally, I’ve read quite a bit about business, including about half of the excellent Personal MBA reading list.
I read somewhere on this site that Thinking and Deciding is pretty much the sequences in book form.
So, my review of Thinking and Deciding claims that T&D is a good introduction to rationality. One of the comments there is a link to Eliezer’s comment that Good and Real is basically the Sequences in book form.
The two are about different topics- T&D is about the meat of rationality (what is thinking, biases, hypothesis generation and testing, values, decisionmaking under certainty and uncertainty), whereas G&R is about the philosophy of reductionism, focusing on various paradoxes, like Newcomb’s Problem. For reasons that I have difficulty articulating, I found G&R painful to read, but I appear to be atypical in that reaction. (I liked the Sequences, and so if you disliked the Sequences my pain might be a recommendation for G&R!)
A primary value of the Sequences, in my opinion, is the resulting philosophical foundation- many people come away from the Sequences with the feeling that their views haven’t changed significantly, but that they have been clarified significantly- which I don’t think one gets from T&D (whereas I do think that T&D is much more effective at training executive-nature / facility with decision-making than the Sequences).
On second thought, I might as well post my career deliberations here, and if it generates a lot of comments (I hope) then I’ll move it to a new post as recommended. Not sure it’s correct protocol to reply to my own comment, but I’ll do it anyway.
So here’s my career thoughts:
As I said, I’m currently working for a small company in a business development capacity. It’s not really the type of work I enjoy, so I’m considering going back to school to follow my dream of becoming a researcher. However, I’m very concerned about the time commitment involved.
My current work allows me lots of wonderful free time to spend on family, friends, hobbies, and leisure activities. This kind of lifestyle is very important to me, and if becoming a researcher means giving it up then I’d rather stay where I am or look for a secondary alternative. Anything more than a standard 40-hour week is pretty much off-limits to me. (OK, maybe 45 hours if absolutely necessary, but definitely not more than that.) That includes all studying time, all online or offline networking time, and all other time related to study or work.
On the other hand, I’m willing to work hard and my current financial situation allows me to work for relatively low pay (30-40K, maybe even a drop less). Also, I’m willing to push off earning any money at all while I go back to school to earn my degree. I’m also willing to take out loans if necessary—and it’ll probably be necessary, since I don’t have more than a couple of introductory college classes under my belt.
The standard research career seems to involve getting a PhD and then moving into an academic position or joining an independent research institute. I’ve been told contradictory things about how much time commitment is required for academic jobs of this type. The general consensus on the internet seems to be that a research career is pretty much all-consuming and the work will take up at least 50-60 hours per week. Some of the academics I know concurred with this. They implied it might get more manageable at some point down the road, but that’s a big might and a long way down the road.
Other academics told me that if I’m good about it it’ll only be crazy for a year or two while getting my PhD, but after that it’s much more manageable. That’s not ideal for me, but I think I can handle 1-2 years of crazy schedule. Still others told me that if I’m really good about it and stand my ground, I’ll probably be able to get away with doing a regular 40-hour workweek.
There seem to be a lot of LW PhDs—what’s your opinion about this?
There are two other research alternatives I’ve considered:
(1) Teach the material to myself. This would allow me to set my own schedule and I wouldn’t even have to take out loans to go to college. On the other hand, it might be very hard for me to get a job down the line, and I wouldn’t even be getting the standard grad student stipend in the meantime.
(2) Switch to a part-time job and study the material by myself on the side. This might seem to be the best idea, but I’m concerned that it’ll take me a really long time to study all the material I’m interested in, considering that I don’t want to spend more than 40 hrs/wk on studying + working.
The particular research areas I’m interested in are as follows:
Rationality: I’m not sure how many research problems are left in this area, but from my readings to date I’d guess there’s still definite room for improvement. Maybe I could get a job at CFAR or something like that.
Computational models of rationality: I’d love to be able to create software that can model and apply rational thinking and decision-making. I think that’s basically data science or maybe AI research—correct me if I’m wrong. In any case I think it would be a smart career move for me to learn computer science & programming, just in case my financial situation isn’t quite as good down the line and I need to have some good marketable skills (I have some now, but I think programming is more along the lines of what I’d enjoy doing).
Applying rationality to specific fields: There are numerous fields that I’m interested in where the research seems to be a real mess. Lots of poorly-done science, lots of faulty statistics, lots of extrapolating unsupported conclusions from inconclusive evidence. I’d love to be able to apply the principles of rationality and rigorous statistics to improve the level of knowledge in those fields. The fields I’m most interested in are positive psychology, social psychology, and educational psychology.
Applying rationality to policy issues: Maybe I could help policy makers (even if only on the local level) by applying rational thinking and decision making to help them create better policies. This would involve learning to influence (manipulate?) otherwise irrational people, and manipulation is something that I loathe, but I think the gains are probably worth it. In particular, I live in a wonderful, close-knit community that nevertheless has some serious poverty and education issues, so I’d love to be able to help solve those issues.
What do you think? Is there some way I can become a rationality researcher and still keep a 40-hour workweek?
Hi, I’ve been lurking for a while. I haven’t yet read most of the sequences, since I find the style not so much to my liking. I prefer textbooks, so I’ll probably go out and get the textbooks on this list or this one instead. I read somewhere on this site that Thinking and Deciding is pretty much the sequences in book form. I did read HP:MOR though—brilliant!
In the meantime, I’ve read a decent amount on LW-related subjects, including the following books on rationality:
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
Everything Is Obvious Once You Know the Answer by Duncan Watts
The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt
The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver
How to Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff
Thinking Statistically by Uri Bram
Another interest is futurism, on which I’ve read the following:
The Singularity Is Near by Ray Kurzweil
Abundance by Peter Diamandis
The Future by Al Gore
The New Digital Age by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen
Big Data by Victor Mayer-Schonberger
Approaching the Future by Ben Hammersley
Radical Abundance by Eric Drexler
I’m also very interested in positive psychology and behavioral change. Good books I’ve read on this include:
Flourish by Martin Seligman
Happiness by Ed Diener
The How of Happiness by Sonja Lyubomirsky
The Happiness Hypothesis by Jonathan Haidt
Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert
Pretty much everything by Gallup, especially the books by Tom Rath
The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg
Self-Directed Behavior by David Watson and Roland Tharp
Finally, I’ve read quite a bit about business, including about half of the excellent Personal MBA reading list.
So, my review of Thinking and Deciding claims that T&D is a good introduction to rationality. One of the comments there is a link to Eliezer’s comment that Good and Real is basically the Sequences in book form.
The two are about different topics- T&D is about the meat of rationality (what is thinking, biases, hypothesis generation and testing, values, decisionmaking under certainty and uncertainty), whereas G&R is about the philosophy of reductionism, focusing on various paradoxes, like Newcomb’s Problem. For reasons that I have difficulty articulating, I found G&R painful to read, but I appear to be atypical in that reaction. (I liked the Sequences, and so if you disliked the Sequences my pain might be a recommendation for G&R!)
A primary value of the Sequences, in my opinion, is the resulting philosophical foundation- many people come away from the Sequences with the feeling that their views haven’t changed significantly, but that they have been clarified significantly- which I don’t think one gets from T&D (whereas I do think that T&D is much more effective at training executive-nature / facility with decision-making than the Sequences).
Thanks. I already had Good & Real on my reading list, but based on this I think I’ll bump it up to higher priority.
On second thought, I might as well post my career deliberations here, and if it generates a lot of comments (I hope) then I’ll move it to a new post as recommended. Not sure it’s correct protocol to reply to my own comment, but I’ll do it anyway.
So here’s my career thoughts:
As I said, I’m currently working for a small company in a business development capacity. It’s not really the type of work I enjoy, so I’m considering going back to school to follow my dream of becoming a researcher. However, I’m very concerned about the time commitment involved.
My current work allows me lots of wonderful free time to spend on family, friends, hobbies, and leisure activities. This kind of lifestyle is very important to me, and if becoming a researcher means giving it up then I’d rather stay where I am or look for a secondary alternative. Anything more than a standard 40-hour week is pretty much off-limits to me. (OK, maybe 45 hours if absolutely necessary, but definitely not more than that.) That includes all studying time, all online or offline networking time, and all other time related to study or work.
On the other hand, I’m willing to work hard and my current financial situation allows me to work for relatively low pay (30-40K, maybe even a drop less). Also, I’m willing to push off earning any money at all while I go back to school to earn my degree. I’m also willing to take out loans if necessary—and it’ll probably be necessary, since I don’t have more than a couple of introductory college classes under my belt.
The standard research career seems to involve getting a PhD and then moving into an academic position or joining an independent research institute. I’ve been told contradictory things about how much time commitment is required for academic jobs of this type. The general consensus on the internet seems to be that a research career is pretty much all-consuming and the work will take up at least 50-60 hours per week. Some of the academics I know concurred with this. They implied it might get more manageable at some point down the road, but that’s a big might and a long way down the road.
Other academics told me that if I’m good about it it’ll only be crazy for a year or two while getting my PhD, but after that it’s much more manageable. That’s not ideal for me, but I think I can handle 1-2 years of crazy schedule. Still others told me that if I’m really good about it and stand my ground, I’ll probably be able to get away with doing a regular 40-hour workweek.
There seem to be a lot of LW PhDs—what’s your opinion about this?
There are two other research alternatives I’ve considered:
(1) Teach the material to myself. This would allow me to set my own schedule and I wouldn’t even have to take out loans to go to college. On the other hand, it might be very hard for me to get a job down the line, and I wouldn’t even be getting the standard grad student stipend in the meantime.
(2) Switch to a part-time job and study the material by myself on the side. This might seem to be the best idea, but I’m concerned that it’ll take me a really long time to study all the material I’m interested in, considering that I don’t want to spend more than 40 hrs/wk on studying + working.
The particular research areas I’m interested in are as follows:
Rationality: I’m not sure how many research problems are left in this area, but from my readings to date I’d guess there’s still definite room for improvement. Maybe I could get a job at CFAR or something like that.
Computational models of rationality: I’d love to be able to create software that can model and apply rational thinking and decision-making. I think that’s basically data science or maybe AI research—correct me if I’m wrong. In any case I think it would be a smart career move for me to learn computer science & programming, just in case my financial situation isn’t quite as good down the line and I need to have some good marketable skills (I have some now, but I think programming is more along the lines of what I’d enjoy doing).
Applying rationality to specific fields: There are numerous fields that I’m interested in where the research seems to be a real mess. Lots of poorly-done science, lots of faulty statistics, lots of extrapolating unsupported conclusions from inconclusive evidence. I’d love to be able to apply the principles of rationality and rigorous statistics to improve the level of knowledge in those fields. The fields I’m most interested in are positive psychology, social psychology, and educational psychology.
Applying rationality to policy issues: Maybe I could help policy makers (even if only on the local level) by applying rational thinking and decision making to help them create better policies. This would involve learning to influence (manipulate?) otherwise irrational people, and manipulation is something that I loathe, but I think the gains are probably worth it. In particular, I live in a wonderful, close-knit community that nevertheless has some serious poverty and education issues, so I’d love to be able to help solve those issues.
What do you think? Is there some way I can become a rationality researcher and still keep a 40-hour workweek?