Posts
Comments
not helpful, but not worth negative ten points either. negative five at worst. upvoted.
I take ritalin and a single cup of coffee most days. Physical exercise is supposedly helpful as well.
Thanks very much for your thoughts, and for making a top level post on the topic. Yes, her contribution to social welfare is something I find very attractive, and you help me remember just how important and rare that is.
Bayesian Statistician Andrew Gelman appears to have some differences with you. See: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2009/02/different_meani.html
Thank you very much for this data point.
Part of what motivates this post is that research on happiness suggests that people have a hard time predicting how happy they will be in various possible futures. Gilbert has suggested that introspection is so poor that we better off just asking people in that situation how they feel.
Its interesting that people seem to a) be as skeptical of my rationality as they seem to be, and b) think that is the crux of the matter.
Regarding a), if someone tells me that they've been reading OB/LW for quite a while and that they think they are considerably more rational than their romantic partner, I think it is very likely that they are correct. But maybe if I was on the other side I would react differently. If I knew of an easy way to prove my rationality I would, but I don't. Even writing an original rational essay wouldn't prove much because I could easily be irrational in other domains.
Regarding b), I'm not sure exactly how important it is that potential advice-givers have a very accurate estimate of my rationality (and my girlfriend's rationality). Perhaps it would be helpful to focus on more specific aspects of our beliefs and approaches to experiencing and acting in the world.
I lean towards preference utilitarianism, though I don't walk the walk as well as I should. I attempt to calculate the costs and benefits of various choices, she does this too sometimes, but doesn't like applying it reflexively. She believes in spirits, I'm into Dennett and Dawkins (though I see positive aspects to religion/spirituality)
My partner and I both agree that: She is much more emotional and I am more rational. She is more prone to depression. She has more faith in intuition, I'm more skeptical of it.
Lets say you've read everything I've written here and you think I'm probably no more rational than my partner. ok, that's fine, I'd be happy to hear advice that works for two equally irrational people with different beliefs/values/approaches to experiencing and acting in the world.
My advice is first, to talk to her a lot about sex and make it clear how important that is to you.
If that doesn't work, consider asking her for permission to sleep with other women. That option would satisfy me in your situation temporarily, but I'd have to think about whether it would satisfy me longer term.
Thank you, this sounds like very good advice for how to lead someone down the path.
But given that she is reluctant to go down the path, do I want to lead her down it? She already believes that I can defend my views better than she can her's. She probably even believes that my views are closer to the truth.
My guess is that she is reluctant to discuss and evaluate the fundamental facts of existence and our values, precisely because she cherishes certain aspects of her current worldview that she correctly believes she is likely to lose. I think its plausible that she'll end up less happy, and maybe less productive, after hearing about the preference utilitarianism and the opportunity cost of spending $80 to have flowers delivered to a friend (note: I'd never try to stop her from doing it, I'd just like to explain why I'm not going to) or after explaining why the idea that people have souls is incoherent (note: I would never say something that strongly. As you suggest I'd want to build up to it slowly, by asking questions and letting the conclusions fall out of the discussion.)
Religious people report being happier. By many measures they also do more "good works." I wouldn't be surprised if the same were true of deontologists vs. consequentialists.
Do I really have reason to believe she'll benefit from serious detailed discussion of our respective worldviews?
Lots more good stuff from Haidt. http://people.virginia.edu/~jdh6n/
A big part of the issue is that I'm not sure whether in depth discussions of my views will a) convince her, or b) help her live a good and happy life, or c) the relationship between a) and b).
Regardless, I'll need to push a little more conversation of LWish topics before doing anything crazy like getting married. She realizes this as well.
Let me explain that sentence a bit more. As you know, preference utilitarianism comes with quite a bit of bullet-swallowing and while I may be less hard core than some, I swallow bullets she seems very hesitant to. Perhaps equally or more importantly, like most people, she doesn't seem to like to taste the bullets, i.e. ponder uncomfortable thoughts, accept uncertainty, etc. I, on the other hand, seem to take some perverse pleasure in thinking and talking about such topics. From her perspective, I sometimes "analyze things e.g. a poem, a play, the proper emotional response to situation X, to death to the point of being distracted from their inherent value."
I would probably give you a response you liked better if I understood why you were asking what you were asking.
Why are you an atheist, (why) do you believe science works...
Because the evidence favors atheism and suggests science leads to truth more often than other approaches to belief formation? I could link to arguments but I don't see the point in trying to explain these things in my own words. Does it help to know that I usually agree with your comments and with the LW consensus, where it exists? Is the implication that the more rational I am, the more of a problem my partners rationality will be?
what is the difference between one person who is actually right and another person who is merely confused, etc.?
I don't think I understand this question.
why do you think it's important to get away from magical thinking? Is it?
I think the importance of getting away from magical thinking varies across people and contexts. I'm not confident I know how important it is, or even whether its helpful, for some people. Its clear that getting away from magical thinking can sometimes help people achieve their personal goals and help make the world a better place.
What is your motivation for thinking about rationality,
I enjoy the process regardless of the consequences. But I also hope that it will help me in my career and help me contribute to the world.
and for dispelling the other person's confusion? "Compatibility" of worldviews?
I think my partner and I both experience some level of discomfort at knowing that our worldviews are in significant conflict, even though this conflict seems to coexist with a high degree of respect for how the accomplishments of the other. It is unfortunate that we basically have to avoid certain topics of conversation that we both find important and that our emotional reaction to things often differs.
You might check my responses to Alicorn to learn more. Once again, thank you very much for responding.
Alicorn, Thanks for responding - see my "Added" to the original comment.
She seems to take a fairly reasonable approach to dealing with / working around her emotional issues and tries hard not to let me suffer because of them.
The atheism / theism divide could be much worse. I'm not sure her beliefs even have net-negative consequences. At present, the main issue is that we each have important beliefs that we don't think we can share. RE: children, we could probably both accept me having the right to be honest about my beliefs but not pushing them, or going into detail unless they really want to hear it or reached 18.
She doesn't generally do things that are obviously and profoundly instrumentally stupid, but its probably fair to worry about whether she might in the future. She'd need some money to spend on her friends more lavishly than I would, and to give to inefficient charities, but it seems unlikely she'd want to spend more than I could indulge.
I think I'm quite rational and have a decent understanding of aspects of rationality that I haven't managed to implement yet. I think karma is a very imperfect measure, but I'll note that I have more than 100 and less than 400.
She is probably one standard deviation above average in terms of IQ, and would score more highly when considering other kinds of intelligence. The main problem in convincing her to think more rationally is emotional resistance.
Thank you for responding - see my "Added" to the original comment.
I need relationship advice and I trust the wisdom and honesty of this community more than most of my friends. I created a new account to ask this question.
I'm with an incredibly compassionate, creative woman. She excels at her job, which is a "helping profession," and one which I believe improves social welfare far more than most. The sex is outstanding.
But she loves magical thinking, she is somewhat averse to expected-utility calculations, my atheism, etc. She is, by her own admission, subject to strong swings of emotion and at greater than average risk of longer-lasting depression. We love each other but are scared that our differences may be too great.
How would you personally feel about a relationship like this? How should I go about deciding whether to continue this?
Added: We have been together more than 6 months. She has learned a decent amount about my way of thinking, but I have not pushed it on her. I frequently mention how great rationality is (but also mock myself to make sure we're all having fun).
I wish I had confidence that trying to convert her to my way of thinking would have net-benefits for her and for the world long-term, but I don't. Not that I'm convinced trying to convert her is a bad idea on utilitarian grounds either, it just seems risky.