Posts
Comments
If you do decide to try it, start with a very low dose.
Where this chain of reasoning breaks down for me is in the "without resistance" phase of "take right action without resistance". If the resistance, both conscious and unconscious, is too strong, there will be no right action taken, whether I will it or no. So what I do instead is undermine the resistance itself. This is my precondition for taking right action. Do you see what I mean? Wu-wei prevents hedonism if wu-wei is essential to hedonism but there can be no wu-wei.
The similarity between our approaches is as you say: the realization that akrasia defeats frontal assaults with heavy casualties. The difference is that you are doing something like the "take right action without resistance" approach that I've encountered before in Buddhism, which matches up nicely with anhedonia (personally I am a hedonist, so this does not work for me); while I am attempting to root out the basic causes of my akrasia, down to the very sources, to change the way I feel in the first place. Both approaches have their merits, and I agree that proper choice of approach relative to the individual depends on factors like personality and culture. Have you encountered any other indirect approaches to defeating akrasia, as we are attempting at present?
Two Disclaimers: First, I am not a doctor. Second, beware of other-optimizing. This advice is working well for me, but it may not work well for others.
The depression became obvious and major enough that I was forced to take action to stop it. The rationalizations had run dry, so I fully realized in both System 1 and System 2 that I was not "unmotivated", I was mentally ill. Years of life hacks and half-assed lifestyle interventions had accomplished some, but not enough, so it was time for medications, which I had previously feared due to bad experiences with bupropion years earlier.
The constraints in my investigation: something effective for major depressive disorder in both the short-term to fight what I was then feeling and in the long-term to prevent relapse, non-serious side effects, anxiolytic properties, as there is comorbid OCD and social anxiety disorder (SA, also this is why I chose medications before psychotherapy), and a reasonable price. Tianeptine met these constraints, with the nice bonus of plausibly being a cognitive enhancer.
Within six weeks of use, the tianeptine decreased the depression such that it was time to focus on the next most serious drag on my productivity and happiness: OCD. Not being majorly depressed allowed me to develop exercise and meditation habits that reduced the OCD down to a similarly manageable level. The anxiolytic effects of the tianeptine and the reduced stress of not being seriously depressed probably also helped.
The depression and OCD were still there and still a nuisance, but they had become minor enough that it was time to continue prioritizing elsewhere. By then tianeptine's anxiolytic properties had faded to mildness due to tolerance, though it has continued to be effective as an antidepressant that at least does not increase anxiety, which was my primary issue with bupropion.
Next on the list was either SA or an uncontrollable sleep cycle, both being about equally problematic. I chose to address the sleep cycle first because modafinil immediately came to mind as a plausible treatment, plus we've all heard of its reputation as an anti-akratic. In hindsight, I should have thought about this more thoroughly before leaping into it. Availability bias at work. Anxiety is an uncommon side effect, but I decided to take the risk. In hindsight, I ought to have realized that for people already dealing with multiple anxiety disorders, that anxiety side effect probably becomes a lot more more common. A statistics fail on my part.
So, I tried modafinil to control my sleep cycle and reduce akrasia, and instead I produced the unshakable certainty that unnamed, unseen monsters were out to get me. Whoops. Looks like my suspicion was correct that I have subclinical generalized anxiety disorder, because the modafinil had exacerbated it to unacceptable levels. The stress of experiencing this also triggered a depression relapse, so I then took myself off the modafinil. Soon enough I recovered to where I had been before trying it.
This leads me to the present. Now I am faced again with the choice of confronting either the sleep cycle problem, SA, or both. My System 1 is wary of fighting the sleep cycle again just yet after being burned last time, so SA it is. I have already taken the edge off, because of social skills training I started months ago and because of the interventions I've taken against OCD, but it is still serious enough to pursue a pharmacological solution.
First on my To Be Scrutinized list is kratom, as I have already been taking theanine for years now. I will investigate effectiveness, safety, cost, and personal fit. Whatever I try, I will also attempt exposure therapy alongside the anxiolytic effects of a medication. If I am successful, I will next have another go at fixing the sleep cycle, then I will either consider my options regarding the notoriously untreatable fact that I am on the autistic spectrum, or else move on to address the much decreased but still niggling depression and OCD.
Agreed. Personal anecdote: once I redefined my "motivation problem" as a "depression and anxiety problem" a number of months ago, and began treating this depression and anxiety instead of wearily trying out yet another willpower hack, I have made more progress in being motivated in months than I had in the previous years.
Your point on a description of Harry's thinking is well-taken. I just had my brother submit this as a review, to err on the side of caution:
"With NickRoy's permission, I am submitting his solution, which I agree with, with additional evidence appended, just in case that is necessary; so consider this as superseding NickRoy's submission:
[the relevant text is here in the submission, but I don't need to repeat it in this comment]
Appended:
Harry does not know the full prophecy for certain, but he can guess it, based on: Harry's thought on star lifting in response to this prophecy in Ch. 21, Harry noticing Quirrelmort's interest in the same prophecy in Ch. 86, Quirrelmort's talk of the stars' vulnerability to "sufficiently intelligent idiocy" in Ch. 95, Firenze's comment on the stars and Harry's innocence in Ch. 101, Voldemort's "while the stars yet live" remark in Ch. 111, Voldemort's more explicit talk on the prophecy and his great fear of it in the next chapter, and how the Unbreakable Vow is framed in the most recent chapter. If Harry connects these dots, he'll have a good idea of what the full prophecy says.
As for how Harry connects these dots: he runs with the hypothesis (quickly, as he did in Ch. 104): "I am to destroy the world [I don't have to explain why this idea stands out to him] in some way that is not actually bad", since if he were to destroy the world in a way that really is bad, but this may be preventable, he probably should die immediately instead! My first thought on this line of thinking (since "Harry is allowed to solve this problem the way I would solve it") is: "well, someday Earth ought to be converted into computronium for hedonium purposes, though the Sun is much more massive, and then we have the nearby stars... Oh".
Also, on Voldemort's response: Voldemort would be skeptical, but he would also be interested, because "It is impossible to tell lies in Parseltongue" and because all this persuasion has to do is raise the risk enough that it makes more sense to stop and gather more information before killing Harry, thus it "allows Harry to evade immediate death"."
Voldemort would be skeptical, yes, but he would also be interested, because "6. It is impossible to tell lies in Parseltongue" and because all this speech has to do is raise the risk enough that it makes more sense to stop and gather more information before killing Harry, thus it "allow[s] Harry to evade immediate death". What do you think would improve the believability?
Sure. Along with the centaur evidence, there's: Harry's thought on star lifting in response to this prophecy in Ch. 21, Harry noticing Quirrelmort's interest in the same prophecy in Ch. 86, Quirrelmort's talk of the stars' vulnerability to "sufficiently intelligent idiocy" in Ch. 95, Voldemort's "while the stars yet live" remark in Ch. 111, Voldemort's more explicit talk on the prophecy and his great fear of it in the next chapter, and how the Unbreakable Vow is framed in the most recent chapter. If Harry connects these dots, he'll have a good idea of what the full prophecy says.
Done.
Harry hisses "You have missinterpreted prophecy, to your great peril, becausse of power I have, but you know not. Yess, you are sstudying sscience, but, honesstly, you are yearss behind me. It may be that thiss power you know not iss ssomething I have at thiss sspecific time, that you will not know for too many yearss hence.
Before I explain, remember my Vow, and know my honesst intention not to desstroy the world, Vow or no. Now, do you know why I would tear apart the very sstarss? Do you know how? Not to desstroy the world, but to ssave it from whatever threatss require more energy to extinguissh than exisstss in thiss entire ssolar ssystem. There are more thingss in heaven and earth, Dark Lord, than are dreamt of in your philossophy.
I would usse sstar lifting to do it ssafely. In a way, I really would end the world to ssave it, ssince once humanss are out of the cradle, sspread through... er, let uss ssay 'heaven' in Parsseltongue, to mean well beyond thiss planet, why not add the masss of the Earth itsself to the sstuff of the sstarss, to yield that much more energy? And sso, if you avert thiss prophecy, there iss sseriouss rissk you doom yoursself! Are you willing to take that chance?
And why were you the one to hear thiss prophecy, Dark Lord? Why are you the one to causse it or avert it? What iss your abssolute advantage? Not in killing. Killing is eassy. Thiss iss your blind sspot cossting you much more in expected value than lasst time if you do not lissten.
You are the one becausse you have come clossesst by far, ass far ass I know, to true immortality, though thiss project iss not yet complete, elsse prophecy would not concern you to degree it obvioussly doess. Usseful sstar lifting will take time; much more than ussual lifesspan.
Ssupposse you heard thiss prophecy becausse you are to sshare thiss advantage with me, and together we will tear apart the very sstarss in 'heaven' to prevent ssomething actually bad! Ssomething we both may know nothing of yet, though I already have guesssess; and you know thiss project iss likely to go fasster with me than without me. Your lack of complete immortality meanss time may not be on your sside.
All I have ssaid iss my honesst besst esstimate. If you do not trusst my viewss, let uss wake girl-child friend, ass sshe alsso knowss more of sscience than you. No offence. And becausse I have told you of sstar lifting, that you clearly knew not of, at thiss time when it matterss mosst - conssider the sserioussnesss of your error if I had tried esscaping - you will protect and honor deputy sschoolmissstresss, with the undersstanding that your reign hass already begun. Now what iss the resst of the prophecy?"
Harry puts it together mainly from clues in the three most recent chapters and Chapter 86.
Edited to add: if you're reading this, Eliezer, please see this comment below for the Appendix.
Paths of Glory (1957), film. Kirk Douglas vs. Moloch. An anti-war film, for reasons both usual and unusual.
I would die of smallpox.
:(
I upvoted, but I'll clarify why, as this is a list: the only name I like on this list is Level Up, but I strongly like it.
Personally, I figure I'm not intelligent enough to research hard problems and I lack the social skills to be an activist, so by process of elimination the best path open to me for doing some serious good is making some serious money. Admittedly, some serious student loan debt also pushes me in this direction!
"Proving useful in your life" (but not necessarily "proving beneficial") is the core of instrumental rationality, but what's useful is not necessarily what's true, so it's important to refrain from using that metric in epistemic rationality.
Example: cognitive behavioral therapy is often useful "to solve problems concerning dysfunctional emotions", but not useful for pursuing truth. There's also mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for an example more relevant to Buddhism.
Ah, I should have taken that possibility into account. Thank you.
Good instrumental rationality quote; not so good for epistemic rationality.
So, with a 60% chance of girlfriend breakup and a 90% chance of new partner acquisition, does this mean a 36% chance of a polyamorous, open, "cheating" or otherwise non-monogamous relationship situation for you at some point over the next year?
Edited to add: actually somewhat higher than 36%, since multiple new partners are possible along with a girlfriend breakup.
Fascinating, thank you. I also realize that I should have Googled that before asking.
Interesting! What do you think a "bi" listing can signal? Openness to experience?
Edited for clarity. Also: I'm not complaining, but I am genuinely curious as to why this comment has been downvoted. Is this a sensitive topic?
Since it's difficult to predict the date of the invention of AGI, has SI thought about/made plans for how to work on the FAI problem for many decades, or perhaps even centuries, if necessary?
Agreed on the excellence of "Why Spock is Not Rational". This chapter is introductory enough that I deployed it on Facebook.
Okay, but only 3.5%. I wonder how many are newbies who haven't read many of the sequences yet, and I wonder how many are simulists.
What surprised you about the survey's results regarding religion?
I currently route around this by being an ethical egoist, though I admit that I still have a lot to learn when it comes to metaethics. (And I 'm not just leaving it at "I still have a lot to learn", either - I'm taking active steps to learn more, and I'm not just signalling that, and I'm not just signalling that I'm not signalling that, etc.)!
I ran across OB while being horribly akrasic on Reddit a few years ago.
My thoughts on further social business opportunities: how about rationality consulting? If SI/LessWrong can establish enough credibility as rationalists this is worth money to both non-profit organizations and for-profit businesses, as well as potentially to consumers (as with Eliezer's rationality books). Rationality consulting would probably have to be done for free at first, of course. As a secondary benefit, this would also help with the ongoing effort to measure the impact rationality training has on an individual or an organization.
On a meta level, offering a prize may be a good way generate social business ideas, since the prize would more than pay for itself if the idea is profitable enough. Resource strategy consultants for non-profit organizations do exist, and business entrepreneurs (having expertise in resource strategies from another angle) might also like the idea of a prize.
This is also a topic that SI's Volunteering program can address, which I notice in the Strategic Plan that SI plans on growing.
Luke responded that "actually, a rationality teaching/consulting business is already in the works! That's the 'Rationality Org' we plan on spinning off from Singularity Institute."
That's an excellent point. I wonder if it's too late at this point for a renaming, or not?
Sorry about that! It's difficult (for me at least) to express tone over the Internet. I'll have to practice that.
Okay, that's a good point, too. However, do you have any social business suggestions in addition to that?
Edited to add: I apologize if my tone came off as being negative here. Such was not my intent.
Okay, that's a good point. Do you have any social business suggestions on top of that, though?
Edited to add: I apologize if my tone came off as being negative here. Such was not my intent.
Non-profit organizations like SI need robust, sustainable resource strategies. Donations and grants are not reliable. According to my university Social Entrepreneurship course, social businesses are the best resource strategy available. The Singularity Summit is a profitable and expanding example of a social business.
My question: is SI planning on creating more social businesses (either related or unrelated to the organization's mission) to address long-term funding needs?
By the way, I appreciate SI working on its transparency. According to my studies, transparency and accountability are also essential to the long-term success of a non-profit organization.
What strikes me most about this post: the enthusiasm! I find it refreshing for this site and appropriate for this subject matter. Congratulations on successfully feeling rational, D_Malik.
Why not use several different methodologies on GiveWell, instead of just one, since there is some disagreement over methodologies? I can understand giving your favorite methodology top billing, of course (both because you believe it is best and it is your site and also to avoid confusion among donors), but there seems to be room for more than one.
True. It might be interesting to see if any hidden commonalities among Less Wrongians exist, however, if the "Other" option comes along with a "fill-in-the-blank" field. It might also be a good idea to include this "Other" option in addition to the other options to avoid everyone checking "Other".
Taken. Thanks Yvain, I appreciate this effort!
Nitpick: why no "Other" categories for Participation and Expertise?
I'm considering the possibility of an experimental treatment becoming available during those two months that could save the terminally ill patient from dying of that illness. Being alive would then allow the possibility of new life extension treatments, would could lead to a very long life indeed.
This would be a conjunction of possibilities, so I realize that the overall possibility of a terminally person transitioning to a very long-lived person is slim, but even a slim chance of living for a very long time is worth almost any degree of suffering. If no experimental treatment becomes available during those two months (the likely outcome), cryonics upon death is the next best legal option. If suicide + cryonics were legal, it would make sense to try that if no experimental treatment were even in the research pipeline, but it's not legal, and so no cryonics organization would go through with it.
Also, as a transhumanist, I don't accept that most of us are eventually going to die of illnesses with fairly miserable end states.
True. I doubt it would be as cheap, safe and effective as it is without modernity, though.
A long-term goal of Less Wrong is to achieve the benefits of religion without becoming a religion. LW Meetups are partially an attempt at achieving a rationalist sense of community, for instance. Stanislav Petrov Day and Vasili Arkhipov Day are steps in the direction of rationalist rituals in general and rationalist holidays in specific. In addition to creating more holidays, I suggest that we figure out ways to celebrate them, rather than simply marking them.
I'll take a crack at it. A holiday celebrating existential risk reduction is a glorious opportunity to develop a habit of gratitude. (See Method #7 of lukeprog's How to Be Happy for the importance of gratitude.) Here are 5 things I am grateful for:
The way my personality shifts barely perceptibly toward the better when I'm socializing with people who have a positive influence on me, and the way this lasts, like inching up a rock wall toward a summit.
Worcester, Massachusetts sunrises and sunsets, which are not always beautiful, but are never the same.
My "good" parents, for their conscientiousness. Apparently I did not inherit it from them, but they do provide strong mimicable examples.
Modern medicine, for keeping me sane. Without aspirin, my TMJ pain would be serious trouble.
Less Wrong, for prompting me to improve myself. My friends have noticed my progress without me asking them about it.
What are you grateful for, or, alternatively, are there better ways to celebrate Vasili Arkhipov Day?
Yet, at least. Hypothetical example: I wonder if something like the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement will eventually switch out the "Voluntary" in favor of "Mandatory". But that's speculative, and you are right empirically.
The same is true for counter-terrorists.
Yvain's raikoth.net.
Something I just noticed from Ch. 55:
Amelia Bones: "Someone would burn for this."
Did Amelia Bones burn Narcissa Malfoy?
I see. Good answer.
Wouldn't this mean that the Great Filter is behind us?
I resolved my typical adolescent existential crisis (for the time being) in a somewhat atypical fashion, concluding after much deliberation that I ought to pause the crisis until I know what's True and what's not, which might mean pausing it forever.
How can I resolve an existential crisis without knowing what meaning, purpose, value, etc. Truly are? Rationality makes the most persuasive claim to the distillation of Truth, so I am an aspiring rationalist.
Thanks for organizing this! Let me know if there's anything I can do to help.
Why value currently alive people dramatically more than not-alive-yet people?