I think my weakest point as a rationalist is my ability to notice when I’m confused. Especially IRL, my desire to maintain composure overwhelms the part of me that says “something’s wrong here.” I don’t fully notice my own confusion until hours later, usually after the conversation is over.
If someone developed an exercise book of faulty arguments to spot the flaws in, I’d love to read that. As far as I know, that doesn’t exist. Reading the arguments in LW comments, even if it isn’t explicitly about increasing instrumental rationality, still seems like a good path to covering the Achilles heel of my rationality.
I have a similar problem. However I spot other people’s fallacies right away, however I have a terrible habit of not seeing my own since the desire to win overwhelms introspection. Hours later I just hold my head in shame at the stupid arguments I used.
This is particularly painful when I won the debate.
I think my weakest point as a rationalist is my ability to notice when I’m confused. Especially IRL, my desire to maintain composure overwhelms the part of me that says “something’s wrong here.” I don’t fully notice my own confusion until hours later, usually after the conversation is over.
If someone developed an exercise book of faulty arguments to spot the flaws in, I’d love to read that. As far as I know, that doesn’t exist. Reading the arguments in LW comments, even if it isn’t explicitly about increasing instrumental rationality, still seems like a good path to covering the Achilles heel of my rationality.
I have a similar problem. However I spot other people’s fallacies right away, however I have a terrible habit of not seeing my own since the desire to win overwhelms introspection. Hours later I just hold my head in shame at the stupid arguments I used.
This is particularly painful when I won the debate.