Learning and Internalizing the Lessons from the Sequences
post by Nick5a1 · 2016-09-14T14:40:28.424Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 9 commentsI'm just beginning to go through Rationality: From AI to Zombies. I want to make the most of the lessons contained in the sequences. Usually when I read a book I simply take notes on what seems useful at the time, and a lot of it is forgotten a year later. Any thoughts on how best to internalize the lessons from the sequences?
9 comments
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by Gram_Stone · 2016-09-14T16:12:50.782Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Eliezer has recommended that one read them twice. I found this helpful.
Replies from: Manfred↑ comment by Manfred · 2016-09-14T17:21:32.823Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Yeah, I really didn't understand the metaethics sequence the first time, but now consider it to be a clear and important section. The difference was in my own ability to understand. I think this is a good reason to do rereading rather than notes or flashcards.
Replies from: Gram_Stone↑ comment by Gram_Stone · 2016-09-15T11:30:17.722Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I also experienced this and agree that one can't meaningfully memorize what one has yet to learn. I find that's an especially common mistake with flashcards.
comment by Sable · 2016-09-16T23:19:15.426Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
My experience was that the Sequences, like most pieces of writing densely packed with information, cannot be understood on a first read-through.
Instead, following how memory works by association, the first time you read through them a little will stick, and the next time more, and so on.
To be slightly more clear:
I suggest that the first time you read through them, focus on the bigger picture. Don't worry about any particular piece you don't understand, just keep going until you finish it. A decent metaphor for this might be how buildings are constructed: during your first reading, you are laying the foundations and creating the skeleton of steel girders.
Your next read-through will help to flesh out more of the meat, and so on.
I stress that it's important to keep going; Rationality is long, and a slog the first time through. If you have to skip ahead, skip.
Hope that helps.
comment by [deleted] · 2016-09-17T05:04:43.249Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
- Gain vocabulary from empirical economics and psychology
- Mentally translate the sequence as you read it as it relates to actual economic and psychological evidence
- Discard that which is unfounded
- That which remains is understood not memorised
↑ comment by Viliam · 2016-09-20T13:32:45.402Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Restating stuff in different words is a good rationalist exercise, and "words used in empirical economics and psychology" is probably a better choice than most others.
Not sure how the language of empirical economics and psychology would help with the quantum physics, or even Bayesian equations, though.
Replies from: None↑ comment by [deleted] · 2016-09-21T21:55:01.969Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
- The 'quantum physics' stuff in the sequences (multiworld theory) is part of the unfounded bucket
- The bayesian equations are statistics, overlapping with both economics and psychology, but I specifically stated empirical because there is an unusual notion that bayesian statistics strictly dominates other statistical approaches in the sequences (unfounded too).
comment by moridinamael · 2016-09-14T17:11:13.211Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
There used to be recurrent Sequences readthroughs. Basically somebody would just post a link to the next entry in the Sequences and it would sit in Discussion for a week or so and be discussed. I found that re-reading them at a slow and deliberate pace really helped with absorption.
This spaced repetition deck was also somewhat useful, though I don't know if it was quite worth the time investment.
comment by [deleted] · 2016-09-14T16:51:28.141Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I have an Anki deck called Sequences - Useful Bits, where I threw some interesting things. Aside from that, re-reading is a good idea, as is talking with people who are familiar with the content.