Kialo was an interesting attempt at creating an infrastructure for discussing controversial topics. It’s worth a look at to understand what I’m talking about, but I can’t recommend it. I tried it out and it doesn’t work well.
But maybe something similar based on collaboratively building Bayesian networks instead of pro/con debate points could work better. Maybe each user could estimate upper- and lower-bound weights for each node, and the computer would run the calculations. It would make it easier to nail down exactly where disagreements are, in the spirit of Double Crux, but with more than two participants. This kind of thing also sounds useful for debugging one’s own thinking on a topic.
I’m not calling this a complete solution (and I have no implementation), it’s just a suggestion for thinking about the infrastructure.
Kialo was an interesting attempt at creating an infrastructure for discussing controversial topics. It’s worth a look at to understand what I’m talking about, but I can’t recommend it. I tried it out and it doesn’t work well.
But maybe something similar based on collaboratively building Bayesian networks instead of pro/con debate points could work better. Maybe each user could estimate upper- and lower-bound weights for each node, and the computer would run the calculations. It would make it easier to nail down exactly where disagreements are, in the spirit of Double Crux, but with more than two participants. This kind of thing also sounds useful for debugging one’s own thinking on a topic.
I’m not calling this a complete solution (and I have no implementation), it’s just a suggestion for thinking about the infrastructure.
Kialo is totally underrated.