CFAR should be about "Rationality for its own sake, for the sake of existential risk". Which is totally different. I just, um, haven't figured out how to say the actual thing clearly. Help very welcome.
Uh, well, it's hard to reply-to, or something? Like, it wants to jam the conversation into questions about whether the claim is "true" or "false", instead of on questions about what is meant by it or what 3rd alternatives might be available or something?
I'd be interested to know if you find yourself having that feeling a lot, while interacting with claims.
If it's a small minority of the time, I think the solution is a "wrong question" button. If it happens a lot, we might need another object type --something like a prompt-for-discussion rather than a claim-to-be-agreed with.
Comments
Anna Salamon
CFAR should be about "Rationality for its own sake, for the sake of existential risk". Which is totally different. I just, um, haven't figured out how to say the actual thing clearly. Help very welcome.
Eric Rogstad
In other words, promoting this claim as worded, is misleading?
Anna Salamon
Uh, well, it's hard to reply-to, or something? Like, it wants to jam the conversation into questions about whether the claim is "true" or "false", instead of on questions about what is meant by it or what 3rd alternatives might be available or something?
Eric Rogstad
I'd be interested to know if you find yourself having that feeling a lot, while interacting with claims.
If it's a small minority of the time, I think the solution is a "wrong question" button. If it happens a lot, we might need another object type --something like a prompt-for-discussion rather than a claim-to-be-agreed with.