Took the survey! Some very interesting questions; I look forward to the analysis.
Suryc11
Karma: 577
Ah, okay. That makes sense, thanks.
Hm, I’m confused. I agree that at least part of the disagreement was over Arthur’s willingness to lie for his cause, but how is that not captured by Viliam_Bur’s post?
Lying for a cause or otherwise playing “dirty” to win for your cause, as Arthur seemed to be advocating, seems to straightforwardly line up with Viliam_Bur’s theory about “Nice Greens”, “Nasty Greens”, “Nice Blues” and “Nasty Blues”; specifically, in this theory, Arthur would be a “Nasty” player on the side of progress/civilization/neoliberalism-ish/etc. and Yvain would be a “Nice” player on the same side.
I guess I’m not sure what you mean by tone?
Relevant SMBC. It illustrates my political theory that in every political conflict that seems to be between Greens and Blues, there are actually four sides of the conflict, let’s call the “Nice Greens”, “Nasty Greens”, “Nice Blues” and “Nasty Blues”. And there is more than one line of conflict.
Officially, “Nice Greens” + “Nasty Greens” and “Nice Blues” + “Nasty Blues” should be the only existing coalitions. But there is also the value of niceness, which somehow connects “Nice Greens” and “Nice Blues”, and puts them into often unconscious opposition against the “Nasty Greens” and “Nasty Blues”. Being nasty is a personality trait… for a “Nasty Green” it is often easier to become a “Nasty Blue” (different slogans, but generally the same behavior) than a “Nice Green” (different everyday behavior both among the enemies and the allies).
Yup, and that is almost exactly what (at least part of) the relatively recent disagreement between Yvain and Arthur Chu was about. See http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2014/02/on-some-criticism-of-lesswrong/ and http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-community-and-civilization/
Thanks!
I compete in powerlifting, so the programs I’ve done—since starting to lift seriously/intentionally—are focused around that, especially recently. A quick summary (let me know if you have questions or want more details!):
My own linear progression program that employed a split and emphasized heavy compounds
Smolov (2 cycles)
Sheiko/Cube Kingpin (both were only done for a few weeks)
GZCL Method (current)
Of all of those, I saw the most squat gains by far from Smolov. The hype is well-deserved. Just started GZCL and I can tell that it’s approximately as good, just more sustainable, i.e., not a competition peaking program.
Some advice that you probably already know, but just in case: record your squat to know exactly what your form looks like to pinpoint weaknesses/sticking points and to make sure you’re hitting depth, weightlifting shoes do help, logging/journaling your workouts is huge (probably one of the most obviously “rational” things to do in weightlifting), and of course, get enough food and sleep.
I squatted 400 lbs at a bodyweight of 154 lbs!
I’ve been doing squats for around 7 months now, and been lifting seriously for slightly over a year total.
I think the barrier to posting a comment in the Open Threads is higher than posting a post in discussion
I think you may have meant this instead: the barrier to posting a post in discussion is higher than posting a comment in the Open Threads.
Agreed, that’s a great way of putting it.
I agree, though to be fair the author himself seems to use malicious and fallacious to describe a privilege framework.
First, I am arguing that no one’s participation in public discourse should be denigrated by appeal to essential features of their identity. If we, as leftists, want to be unashamedly critical of discourse—as we should be—we should do so with reference to structures of power, such as heterosexual hegemony, rather than with reference to essential identities, such as the ‘straightness’ of particular individuals.
...
Second, I am arguing that to situate ideology in identity can not only be malicious, but also fallacious. If a self-identified queer person were to have written “How Gay Pride Backfires”, the privilege framework would collapse as an explanans, as it would no longer be able to appeal to the heterosexual privilege of the author to explain the danger of the argument. Importantly, however, in this alternative scenario, the queerness of the author would not render the article any less ideological and detrimental to the interests of sexual minorities.
This is a really great take on why use of privilege-based critique in (often leftist) public discourse is flawed:
(Tl;dr: it’s both malicious, because it resorts to using essential features of interlocutors against them—ie, quasi-ad hominems—and fallacious, because it fails to explain why the un(der)-privileged can offer arguments that work against their own interests.)
Re the growth mindset, exactly! It’s really quite gratifying to be able to literally quantify how much you’ve become a “better” version of yourself through your direct efforts.
I just think it’s unfortunate that the rational component and the weightlifter component of self-identity are often not found together, when both can learn so much from each other. (Plus, of course, it’s kinda contrarian-ly cool being both a nerd and a gym rat.)
Nice to see a fellow powerlifter here! My first meet was just last month and it was an amazing experience. By the way, those are impressive stats, especially for 6 months.
I find this bit incredibly confusing:
If “you” is your conscious brain, then clearly you do affect your decisions for if this were not the case you would not have evolved a conscious brain in the first place.
I pattern-match this to attributing agency to evolution?
Also, there is an obvious distinction between your deciding an action freely and affecting a decision (second and third sentences).
I appreciate the example, but I think the terseness here significantly lowers the informational value.
Anecdotal support for exercising:
Exercise (specifically weightlifting) has been the single most valuable lifestyle change I’ve implemented. It’s drastically improved my confidence and self-esteem, instilled in my self-identity usually beneficial characteristics like “able to persevere through hardship for some goal,” and greatly increased my social status.
Highly, highly recommend it.
(Cred: meet conditions 375/245/425 @ 140 lbs.)
Took the survey. Very interesting questions overall, especially the site-wide Prisoner’s Dilemma.
I’d like to note that I was very confused by the (vague and similar) CFAR questions regarding the possibility of people changing, but I’m assuming that was intentional and look forward to an explanation.
(I ctrl-F’ed this but couldn’t find anything similar.)
Could you add a question or questions along these lines:
In a typical week, approximately how many minutes do you spend in moderately vigorous physical activity (at least as strenuous as brisk walking)?
If you lift weights, what is your (non-estimated) one rep max for bench press? Squat? Deadlift? Overhead press?
This is really, really cool.
Is there a similar iPhone app to TagTime? I can’t seem to find one.
Or even some app that randomly notifies me to record my happiness level, etc.?
Sources, please?
Thanks!
Yes, definitely. I frequently use Evernote to save online references (one of my notebooks is actually named “(Intellectual) References” and has stuff like academic articles that I later want to refer to) because the ability to tag, comment, and later search these web clips makes bookmarks seem completely useless. I also use Evernote for journaling purposes and as a way to improve exam studying.
Before an exam, I go through my handwritten notes and other class materials and compile a summary in Evernote. This ensures that I have a record of the most important things from my classes (some of which I would otherwise forget), as well as makes studying for a cumulative test easy.
Sorry for the long answer, but yes, I still find Evernote awesome.
Seconding Evernote for managing both citations and information in general.
The ability to tag content is indispensable, and combined with a powerful search, Evernote becomes an external hard drive for your brain.
One thing to keep in mind is that this is one of those things that becomes progressively more useful the more you use it and invest in it (e.g., clip anything of interest, tag religiously).
Good comment; I’ve noticed this myself. Fyi, in case you didn’t know and might be interested, Nate Soares has written a few blog posts on this exact topic: Self-signaling the ability to do what you want and Productivity through self-loyalty.