Superforecaster, social science, metascience, data science. USA & Canada.
On Twitter or BlueSky you’d find me @thatMikeBishop
Mike Bishop
Karma: 658
Sure, convince those you love. I was asking who you should try to convince if your goal is convincing someone who will themselves convince a lot of other people.
Convincing Dawkins would be a great strategy for promoting cryonics… who else should the community focus on convincing?
broken link on “usually correlate”?
Project Follow Through, the study most frequently cited as proving the benefits of Direct Instruction is far from perfect. Neither classrooms nor schools, were randomly assigned to curricula. Its not clear how students ended up in treatment vs. comparison groups but it probably happened differently in different communities. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Follow_Through#Analytical_methods for a bunch of info and more references.
Software for Critical Thinking, Prof. Geoff Cumming
Claims that the extent to which will power is exhaustible depends on one’s belief about it’s exhaustibility: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101014144318.htm
We should feel good about the fact that some biases of different research designs will cancel each other out, while bad about our inability to weight each study optimally.
I take it Stanovich is doing a lot of experiments where he controls for IQ, or compares performance within and across IQ groups. Here is my concern… there is always measurement error, and the more error in his measure of IQ, the more it will appear he’s measuring something distinct from IQ which he terms “rationality.”
That said, I also agree that IQ, and G, are often reified. The point is, I’m not sure Stanovich has succeeded in carving cognition skills at their joints, but I don’t have anything better to offer.
I don’t think we should push too hard on the dichotomy of boy vs. man. I would emphasize that there is individual variation in how well men they can perform/achieve masculinity in their sub-culture. Women face the issue as well.
For many people, their gender is an incredibly important aspect of their identity. One can think of a given subculture as having an ideal performance of masculinity. Men and women both respect that ideal. Certain occupations have been traditionally seen as very good ways of achieving that ideal. If women enter into such an occupation, the occupation is no longer seen as validating mens’ manly virtues.
I oppose sex-discrimination in hiring, but there is no denying that this is a very serious loss for some men. Eventually, norms and ideals evolve in a way which allows men to continue to have their masculinity validated, and/or de-emphasizes gender as a component of one’s identity, but this is a slow process. Moreover, with any change in values, there will always be winners and losers.
If you want to be on the cutting edge scientifically, you need to plan on a graduate degree. Find people doing the sort of research you are interested in and ask them for advice. Better yet, try to get a job in their lab. You’ll have to get very specialized and the biggest discoveries will probably be using a different approach than whatever approach you’re attempting. But hey, that’s life, its honorable to give it a shot.
If you’re more interested in the business, legal, or public policy, and/or education issues, then the hard science education probably isn’t so important.
Bottom line: I suggest you say much more about the careers that interest you.
You say almost nothing about long-term career goals, which most people would determine what credentials are most useful, which is many, if not most, people’s primary motivation for earning a university degree.
So you want to do an undergraduate degree but you don’t care about earning a helpful credential and you’ll attend lectures but not listen to them.
...and I thought I had unusual tastes.
I plan on devoting very little time studying outside of formal lectures. (This will mean careful use of my time during lectures and all that I know on optimal learning techniques. My philosophy has always been that you either need to attend or you need to study but never both! (Perhaps I should add in IQ and say ‘pick two’).
Personally, I learn faster studying on my own than by listening to 90% of lectures. I would think this would be especially true for a) classes at the undergraduate level and b) classes where I’m not concerned about my grade so much as I’m concerned about learning what I think is interesting/important.
If I had to choose a single piece of evidence off of which to argue that the rationality assumption of neoclassical economics is totally, irretrievably incorrect...
Since this is framed as a hypothetical, its not clear exactly what your thoughts are on the subject, but I always encourage people to ask whether a model aids our thinking, or hinders it, rather then whether it is correct or incorrect.
care to explain why we should expect sensitivity to initial conditions to matter in the particular example being discussed here?
I agree that GDP is imperfect. If it were easy to perfect then it would have been done already. Should more resources be devoted to the issue? Probably. I support the use of multiple measures of wealth and well-being. But I do think that when GDP goes up, that usually indicates good things are happening. Other indicators usually track it.
I’m not trying to deny you’ve noticed a problem, I just think that you’re overstating it because even though GDP is imperfect, there is still a lot to be learned from empirical research that uses it.
We were asked a sort of odd question which was which apartment choice would help the economy when not taking into account the individuals preferences about apartments. Those preferences in fact dominate the overall effect on the economy. I wouldn’t recommend anyone personally attempting Keynesian stimulus.
Increasing the amount of money changing hands only helps in certain circumstances, and even then it is not necessarily the dominant effect.
What about the examples of intelligent stimulus I offered?
I used cryonics as example because komponisto used it before me. I intended my question to be more general. “If you’re trying to market LW, or ideas commonly discussed here, then which celebrities and opinion-leaders should you focus on?”