Over all very good, I found that referring to the article 3 different ways, (Elephant and Rider) (Autopilot and Intentional systems) (Systems 1 and 2) was confusing.
The Elephant and Rider metaphor just did not hold up for me mentally. I don’t think of elephants and Autopilot, neither dose the Rider bring intentional to mind. Being Technically trained I preferred the Autopilot and Intentional systems also, but I can very well see that some of my Academically trained friends will have a preference for System 1 and 2.
I also would expect that their will be at least some discussion what things go in the Autopilot grouping and what functions would be more accurately described as Intentional. The first of these that came to my mind was the function that “Activates?” “Turns On?” the Intentional system. This also leads me to wonder if their is not in fact at least one other system at work here, Perhaps a Monitoring System, A Tattle Tale system, some thing like that? In my field Binary systems that work are very rare almost always has to have cause/effect and control. or using the elephant and rider metaphor you need a pile of logs. (Really Bad Example but you get my point I hope). perhaps not in this case or perhaps the monitoring system is part of either the autopilot or intentional system.
Over all I accept that the systems described are likely functionally accurate. Simplified to the point that they can be presented in a short enough post that will be completely read by most and still get the concepts across. Very good popular writing.
The Links were very much appreciated. more complex/complete information even when I started to get lost in the detail, knowing that the detail was there added substantial credibility to the post. it has been a long time since I had so many tabs open at the same time. while I lack a lot of the background knowledge of a neuroscientist I was still able to follow the lines of thought.
Thanks for your thoughtful engagement! The metaphors work differently for different people: for some they are useful, for some less so. My wife and I use the elephant and rider metaphors quite frequently when we talk with each other, and in our own thinking—they work well for us. Glad that you found the framing and the writing helpful, as well as the references :-)
I really appreciate your support, but please stop these posts, whoever you are, as you are creating a bad impression of Intentional Insights through posting these multiple comments. Thanks!
Links to that website have been spammed onto LW before. I am becoming more and more sympathetic to OrphanWilde’s comments on Gleb’s recent thread. (Apropos of which, I don’t think I’d have thought “Ella” was terribly suspicious until I read Gleb’s comment defending her, after which I now reckon Pr(sockpuppet) ~= 0.75. My apologies, Ella, if you happen to be reading this and are not in fact a sockpuppet.)
Though … I wonder about this. Comment-spamming LW with this sort of thing seems like such a tone-deaf thing to do, and doing it twice so super-extra-tone-deaf, that I’m wondering about more exotic explanations. Some third party who has a grudge against Gleb and wants to give his outfit a bad name? A more general comment-spamming campaign executed by someone who didn’t know that LW would be a bad choice of place to post comment spam? I dunno.
The thing that is driving me crazy WRT Gleb is exactly the tone-deafness. It’s not just bad, it’s bizarro-world bad, to the point where it feels like it’s that bad on purpose only I can’t imagine any possible purpose. That’s the “recursive” aspect to the weirdness.
(I actually came across iamhappy in my search of his posts for other Ella-like accounts, as opposed to in the recent comments; I didn’t see an immediate connection, so I dismissed it as a spambot, and didn’t initially notice the spam was new. There were two other Ella-like accounts, not including iamhappy.)
Yikes, just discovered these comments. Not sure what’s going on there. I pointed out above that while I appreciate that person liking the MPQ, it’s not appropriate to post these here in this spammy manner.
Over all very good, I found that referring to the article 3 different ways, (Elephant and Rider) (Autopilot and Intentional systems) (Systems 1 and 2) was confusing.
The Elephant and Rider metaphor just did not hold up for me mentally. I don’t think of elephants and Autopilot, neither dose the Rider bring intentional to mind. Being Technically trained I preferred the Autopilot and Intentional systems also, but I can very well see that some of my Academically trained friends will have a preference for System 1 and 2.
I also would expect that their will be at least some discussion what things go in the Autopilot grouping and what functions would be more accurately described as Intentional. The first of these that came to my mind was the function that “Activates?” “Turns On?” the Intentional system. This also leads me to wonder if their is not in fact at least one other system at work here, Perhaps a Monitoring System, A Tattle Tale system, some thing like that? In my field Binary systems that work are very rare almost always has to have cause/effect and control. or using the elephant and rider metaphor you need a pile of logs. (Really Bad Example but you get my point I hope). perhaps not in this case or perhaps the monitoring system is part of either the autopilot or intentional system.
Over all I accept that the systems described are likely functionally accurate. Simplified to the point that they can be presented in a short enough post that will be completely read by most and still get the concepts across. Very good popular writing.
The Links were very much appreciated. more complex/complete information even when I started to get lost in the detail, knowing that the detail was there added substantial credibility to the post. it has been a long time since I had so many tabs open at the same time. while I lack a lot of the background knowledge of a neuroscientist I was still able to follow the lines of thought.
Thank you.
Thanks for your thoughtful engagement! The metaphors work differently for different people: for some they are useful, for some less so. My wife and I use the elephant and rider metaphors quite frequently when we talk with each other, and in our own thinking—they work well for us. Glad that you found the framing and the writing helpful, as well as the references :-)
I was recently on a quest to find meaning & purpose to life. My efforts were proving futile until I found the MPQ Tool. Read more about my story here at: http://www.happening-life.com/what-is-the-meaning-of-life-2/
I was recently on a quest to find meaning & purpose to life. My efforts were proving futile until I found the MPQ Tool. Read more about my story here at: http://www.happening-life.com/what-is-the-meaning-of-life-2/
I really appreciate your support, but please stop these posts, whoever you are, as you are creating a bad impression of Intentional Insights through posting these multiple comments. Thanks!
I’ll save all y’all the trouble and directly quote the relevant part:
Links to that website have been spammed onto LW before. I am becoming more and more sympathetic to OrphanWilde’s comments on Gleb’s recent thread. (Apropos of which, I don’t think I’d have thought “Ella” was terribly suspicious until I read Gleb’s comment defending her, after which I now reckon Pr(sockpuppet) ~= 0.75. My apologies, Ella, if you happen to be reading this and are not in fact a sockpuppet.)
Though … I wonder about this. Comment-spamming LW with this sort of thing seems like such a tone-deaf thing to do, and doing it twice so super-extra-tone-deaf, that I’m wondering about more exotic explanations. Some third party who has a grudge against Gleb and wants to give his outfit a bad name? A more general comment-spamming campaign executed by someone who didn’t know that LW would be a bad choice of place to post comment spam? I dunno.
The thing that is driving me crazy WRT Gleb is exactly the tone-deafness. It’s not just bad, it’s bizarro-world bad, to the point where it feels like it’s that bad on purpose only I can’t imagine any possible purpose. That’s the “recursive” aspect to the weirdness.
(I actually came across iamhappy in my search of his posts for other Ella-like accounts, as opposed to in the recent comments; I didn’t see an immediate connection, so I dismissed it as a spambot, and didn’t initially notice the spam was new. There were two other Ella-like accounts, not including iamhappy.)
Yikes, just discovered these comments. Not sure what’s going on there. I pointed out above that while I appreciate that person liking the MPQ, it’s not appropriate to post these here in this spammy manner.
A bit of googling would point to Ella being a Filipino girl with a FB and a Twitter account.
Noted. Probability estimate duly nudged downward. (And Pr(meatpuppet) increased just a little.)
Yup, Ella is from Albay in the Phillipines. She is an aspiring rationalist who was introduced to Less Wrong through Intentional Insights content.
As I said below, just discovered these. Not my work at all. Sorry to see these spammy comments.