Then, over time as the bitcoin maxi position fell to more and more faults, the term came to be used with the latter more pejorative meaning. People no longer saw bitcoin maximalism as a defensible position, and thus came to see bitcoin maxis thinking illogically and with a closed mind.
Citation needed? I haven’t been following this topic closely, but I’m pretty sure this is still highly contested territory so I’m surprised that you’re either asking us to trust you on this, or assuming an already existing consensus among your audience.
Have you seen Vitalik’s recent In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism? There’s some speculation that it was an April Fools joke, which Vitalik addressed in an interview at https://youtu.be/m4vYEn_Twog?t=975. In short, it’s not his “primary opinion” but he sees “benefits in both sides”. Seems to contradict your “People no longer saw bitcoin maximalism as a defensible position” statement.
A good point about the general pattern of conversion from a belief to belief in belief. There must be a standard name for this phenomenon, though, and “maxi” doesn’t ring a bell outside bitcoin true believers. The terms that come to mind are “radical”, “orthodox”, “militant” and “fundamentalist”, depending on the domain.
Well, don’t rid yourself of beliefs that actually work. You’re arguing against having beliefs for the wrong reasons, and against having beliefs that won’t update when circumstances or knowledge changes. I fully agree with both of those motivations, but the advice should be find better grounding for your beliefs”, rather than “unconditionally dispose of those beliefs.”
It’s possible that Bitcoin will be the only survivor of the massive coin and scam expansion that’s inevitable as a new thing becomes popular. The root belief that starting new coins hurts everyone except the founders/scammers who get in early could be correct. And even people who believe this for the wrong reasons (they’ve heard it so often that they repeat it without thinking through the mechanisms) are correct in their behavior. Those people can improve their outcomes with some research and modeling that adds nuance and exceptions to that creed, but not by throwing it out entirely and putting lots of money into every new hotness that comes along.
Citation needed? I haven’t been following this topic closely, but I’m pretty sure this is still highly contested territory so I’m surprised that you’re either asking us to trust you on this, or assuming an already existing consensus among your audience.
Have you seen Vitalik’s recent In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism? There’s some speculation that it was an April Fools joke, which Vitalik addressed in an interview at https://youtu.be/m4vYEn_Twog?t=975. In short, it’s not his “primary opinion” but he sees “benefits in both sides”. Seems to contradict your “People no longer saw bitcoin maximalism as a defensible position” statement.
A good point about the general pattern of conversion from a belief to belief in belief. There must be a standard name for this phenomenon, though, and “maxi” doesn’t ring a bell outside bitcoin true believers. The terms that come to mind are “radical”, “orthodox”, “militant” and “fundamentalist”, depending on the domain.
Well, don’t rid yourself of beliefs that actually work. You’re arguing against having beliefs for the wrong reasons, and against having beliefs that won’t update when circumstances or knowledge changes. I fully agree with both of those motivations, but the advice should be find better grounding for your beliefs”, rather than “unconditionally dispose of those beliefs.”
It’s possible that Bitcoin will be the only survivor of the massive coin and scam expansion that’s inevitable as a new thing becomes popular. The root belief that starting new coins hurts everyone except the founders/scammers who get in early could be correct. And even people who believe this for the wrong reasons (they’ve heard it so often that they repeat it without thinking through the mechanisms) are correct in their behavior. Those people can improve their outcomes with some research and modeling that adds nuance and exceptions to that creed, but not by throwing it out entirely and putting lots of money into every new hotness that comes along.