How do you accept others even when they're so irrational?

Jesus!* Your post provokes an emotional reaction in me, which I will now try to translate into something sensible.

I am irrational, trying to become less so. I've got a way to go. Also, I think I am less intelligent than much of the Less Wrong community. I'm sorry to say I don't expect this to change soon.

It's a continuum, not a discrete or binary division. There are people smarter and there are people more rational than you (for pretty much anybody who will read this.) So how can they accept you?

One of the things that drew me to Eliezer Yudkowsky's writings and to Less Wrong was the profound moral component. As I understand it, his mission isn't just for you smart folks, it's for everyone, including those of us who may be deluded and irrational and of merely normal intelligence, or below-normal intelligence. For example, it wasn't that long ago that he commented that cryonics (for example) should be for " all human beings and, just in case, chimpanzees ." I could think of other examples of what I take to be the moral dimension of this forum. I think it's fundamental to this forum.

* I don't actually believe in Jesus. Just a way of signifying an emotional reaction.

Even irrational people have experienced near-mode rationality, otherwise known as "common sense" (cached response: if only it was) - being subject to it, even if not being able to exercise it. So if you can somehow keep small bits of that in play in the conversation, you can establish that conversations involving you are expected to employ at least a bit of sense. Even that they will involve potentially having to show one's working at some stage, even if not right now (and even if you don't ever call them on it).

Of course, then they'll cut'n'paste something from the Daily Mail/Fox News (delete as appropriate) into the conversation and you'll have an urge to hit them with a hammer. It's a tricky one.

I have a hard time understanding what people mean by "accept" in this usage. You obviously don't doubt the fact of the matter that many people are irrational. It sounds like you might mean that this fact makes you angry. By "accepting others" do you mean that you're looking for advice on how to be less angry?

You could think of discussions with certain people as fun rather than an exchange of ideas. If you're in a discussion in which you feel neither side is likely to learn from the other, then just optimise for fun -- fun for both parties, that is. Change topics rapidly, make light of statements that in other situations you would analyse, guide the discussions towards fun topics rather than informative ones.

If you're talking to someone with unbearably absurd beliefs and all else fails, then just have fun seeing how far you can go making unreasonably extreme random statements. Don't be rude, though :)

I don't think that it's possible to convince most people to be more rational. It usually causes more problems than it's worth. And as a result, I often have to make white lies or pretend to believe in things I don't believe in, even though those things kill me inside.

This is a problem, and unfortunately my only solution is to cease (or at least minimize) the contact I have with such people. I say "unfortunately" because 100% of the people I know IRL are uninterested in rationality, so the net result is generally that I spend all of my free time on the internet.

I often have to make white lies or pretend to believe in things I don't believe in, even though those things kill me inside.

Having a stable relationship with one person who has a flexible mind works well for me. I don't have to lie, and I don't get lonely.

Flexibility is more important than rationality. A person can learn rationality if they are flexible, but if they aren't flexible they can't learn anything at all.

I spent, or perhaps wasted, 8 years on my first marriage to learn the information in the previous paragraph, so pay attention. If you don't want to spend large amounts of time on relationships that go nowhere, you have to judge people and reject the ones you don't like, rather than compromise about things you care about. Too much acceptance can be a problem.

It looks to me like your problem is getting other people to accept you. Your options seem to be: lie, follow their standards, and convince them to accept you without following their standards.

You can do a combination, like get them to accept some things, follow some standards, and lie about some things.

What you call "overmoralization" I would call "undermoralization". Wouldn't you agree that locking someone in a cage or taking their property without sufficient reason is immoral?