0 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Said Achmiz (SaidAchmiz) · 2018-02-13T18:52:11.068Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

So I’m hoping for all kinds of uncomfortable, growth inducing disagreement.

Well, since you asked nicely… ;)

American gated communities are fully closed, and missionaries in North Korea are fully open. Got it? Cool.

Wait, what? Explain the “missionaries in North Korea” allusion. What makes them “open”…?

But more substantively:

Are you deeply miserable? Then run to the closed pole.

Ok, I’m with you so far…

Are you deeply comfortable, even smug? Then run to the open pole.

… why?

I mean, you can justify this with a normative appeal to the value of truth and so on. I would support such an appeal. I’m definitely very much on board with the value of truth for its own sake.

However, there seems to be a tension, in your post, between the following two (partly explicit, partly implied) views:

View One: If you’re too closed, you will encounter toxic incentive gradients, toxoplasma of rage, and perhaps ineffectiveness, self-destructive (on a community level) behavior, etc.

View Two: If you’re too closed, you will be “deeply comfortable, even smug”.

Aren’t those views contradictory? Can I really be “deeply comfortable” while also having all those problems which View One portrays? Wouldn’t those problems in fact cause me to be “deeply miserable”?

And if indeed the two views are contradictory, then the question arises: if, indeed, I am “deeply comfortable”, then why should I run anywhere? (Other than the value of truth-for-its-own-sake, that is.)

Replies from: bugsbycarlin

↑ comment by bugsbycarlin · 2018-02-13T21:58:03.906Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I had to think about this, so thanks!

I should have specified that deeply miserable was more of a short term judgement, specifically on a people dimension. If your interactions with people are causing you to be deeply miserable, it's probably a good idea to retract.

But, to me, a really high level of short term comfort in people space indicates a position which is short term good and long term very bad. This isn't always the case, but as a first pass, it sets off alarm bells. It's like the social equivalent of too much candy. "This tastes too good. It can't be good for me to ingest this and only this."

I also think this is because the bad behaviors listed only arise out of a smug level of comfort.

But I still have a hard time explaining when and why the candy feeling actually indicates the candy danger. I think it needs further discussion and further thought.

Missionaries in North Korea, for all their other faults, are spending a lot of social time with people they know to hate them. Relatively speaking, they're spending a lot of time with the differently-minded.

Replies from: abramdemski, SaidAchmiz

↑ comment by abramdemski · 2018-02-14T06:51:48.913Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I, too, am uncomfortable with the "too comfortable" heuristic. Social comfort doesn't seem like the problematic thing here.

Here are several alternate warning signs for being in too much of a filter bubble:

Are you getting accurate feedback on what matters? The way I interpreted Cheat to Win was that you're trying to surround yourself with people who value the things you value, so that the feedback you get on what you're doing is meaningful to you. Feedback from others may just be on an irrelevant metric of quality. But, perhaps there are some things which you can't just rely on close allies for. If you are trying to write a novel to be a nationwide best seller, you might not be able to get the feedback you need from your pre-existing fans.
Are you ignoring some potential consequences of your actions? Maybe you're trying to revolutionize 3D printing, and you only hang out with guns-rights activists who think giving everyone the ability to print a gun is pure upside. So ask yourself: do your actions only effect you and your group of supporters? If no, have you thought seriously about who else is being effected and whether you might be ignoring negative effects?
Is there a group of people who seriously disagree with some assumptions you make? Would you know if there were? (Have you checked?) If there is, have you engaged with their concerns to the point where you're satisfied? Is it possible you'll be kicking yourself years later for not engaging more?

↑ comment by Said Achmiz (SaidAchmiz) · 2018-02-13T22:28:59.780Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I had to think about this, so thanks!

You’re quite welcome.

Follow-ups:

What is “short term comfort”? If I am comfortable, how do I tell whether that is “short term comfort” or “long term comfort” (whatever that is)?