Difference between revisions of "User:Chriswaterguy"
From Lesswrongwiki
(→A communication sequence) |
(→A communication sequence: ask, guess & tell cultures) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ Politics is the Mind-Killer] – "Politics is an important domain to which we should individually apply our rationality—but it's a terrible domain in which to learn rationality, or discuss rationality, unless all the discussants are already rational." & "it doesn't matter whether (you think) the [specific political party] really is at fault. It's just better for the spiritual growth of the community to discuss the issue without invoking [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gt/a_fable_of_science_and_politics color politics]." | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ Politics is the Mind-Killer] – "Politics is an important domain to which we should individually apply our rationality—but it's a terrible domain in which to learn rationality, or discuss rationality, unless all the discussants are already rational." & "it doesn't matter whether (you think) the [specific political party] really is at fault. It's just better for the spiritual growth of the community to discuss the issue without invoking [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gt/a_fable_of_science_and_politics color politics]." | ||
* [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gz/policy_debates_should_not_appear_onesided/ Policy Debates Should Not Appear One-Sided] – "Two primary drivers of policy-one-sidedness are the [http://lesswrong.com/lw/lg/the_affect_heuristic/ affect heuristic] and the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_fallacy just-world fallacy]." | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gz/policy_debates_should_not_appear_onesided/ Policy Debates Should Not Appear One-Sided] – "Two primary drivers of policy-one-sidedness are the [http://lesswrong.com/lw/lg/the_affect_heuristic/ affect heuristic] and the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_fallacy just-world fallacy]." | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Social aspects of communication (or is that a tautology?): | |
| + | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/1yz/levels_of_communication/ Levels of communication] | ||
* [http://lesswrong.com/lw/1wu/reasoning_isnt_about_logic_its_about_arguing/ Reasoning isn't about logic (it's about arguing)] | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/1wu/reasoning_isnt_about_logic_its_about_arguing/ Reasoning isn't about logic (it's about arguing)] | ||
* [http://lesswrong.com/lw/hz/correspondence_bias/ Correspondence Bias] (also known as the fundamental attribution error) [[Correspondence bias|in brief on the wiki]]) | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/hz/correspondence_bias/ Correspondence Bias] (also known as the fundamental attribution error) [[Correspondence bias|in brief on the wiki]]) | ||
| + | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/375/ask_and_guess/ Ask and Guess] | ||
| + | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/jis/tell_culture/ Tell Culture] | ||
Emotion and making sense: | Emotion and making sense: | ||
| Line 25: | Line 28: | ||
* [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gm9/philosophical_landmines/ Philosophical Landmines] – "If something you say makes people go off on a spiral of bad philosophy, don't get annoyed with them, just fix what you say. This is just being a communications consequentialist." | * [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gm9/philosophical_landmines/ Philosophical Landmines] – "If something you say makes people go off on a spiral of bad philosophy, don't get annoyed with them, just fix what you say. This is just being a communications consequentialist." | ||
** Responding to a landmine explosion: It may be best to "abort the conversation." Alternatively, [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gm9/philosophical_landmines/8fc8 a commenter suggests], "stop taking sides and talk about the plus and minuses of each side." | ** Responding to a landmine explosion: It may be best to "abort the conversation." Alternatively, [http://lesswrong.com/lw/gm9/philosophical_landmines/8fc8 a commenter suggests], "stop taking sides and talk about the plus and minuses of each side." | ||
| + | * Off-LW: [http://measureofdoubt.com/2012/06/11/be-a-communications-consequentialist/ Be a Communications Consequentialist], Jesse Galef. | ||
* Inferential distance: | * Inferential distance: | ||
** [[Inferential distance|in brief]] | ** [[Inferential distance|in brief]] | ||
** [http://lesswrong.com/lw/kh/explainers_shoot_high_aim_low/ Explainers Shoot High. Aim Low!] – "we tend to enormously underestimate the effort required to properly explain things." | ** [http://lesswrong.com/lw/kh/explainers_shoot_high_aim_low/ Explainers Shoot High. Aim Low!] – "we tend to enormously underestimate the effort required to properly explain things." | ||
** [http://lesswrong.com/lw/kg/expecting_short_inferential_distances/ Expecting Short Inferential Distances] (explaining in evolutionary terms why this is such a problem today) | ** [http://lesswrong.com/lw/kg/expecting_short_inferential_distances/ Expecting Short Inferential Distances] (explaining in evolutionary terms why this is such a problem today) | ||
| − | |||
Biases, heuristics and fallacies that affect communication: | Biases, heuristics and fallacies that affect communication: | ||
Revision as of 15:23, 4 December 2014
Me in brief:
- I coach people in clearing anger, bitterness & other negative emotions. I'm keen to be evidence-based about this, but in this field, evidence is often fuzzy, and experience is an important guide.
- I've worked in sustainability knowledge-sharing.
- I know about wikis, and help run Appropedia, the sustainability wiki.
A communication sequence
(Work in progress. Suggestions appreciated.)
What's happening in your reasoning brain:
- Arguments as soldiers (in brief)
- Politics is the Mind-Killer – "Politics is an important domain to which we should individually apply our rationality—but it's a terrible domain in which to learn rationality, or discuss rationality, unless all the discussants are already rational." & "it doesn't matter whether (you think) the [specific political party] really is at fault. It's just better for the spiritual growth of the community to discuss the issue without invoking color politics."
- Policy Debates Should Not Appear One-Sided – "Two primary drivers of policy-one-sidedness are the affect heuristic and the just-world fallacy."
Social aspects of communication (or is that a tautology?):
- Levels of communication
- Reasoning isn't about logic (it's about arguing)
- Correspondence Bias (also known as the fundamental attribution error) in brief on the wiki)
- Ask and Guess
- Tell Culture
Emotion and making sense:
- Politics is the Mind-Killer
- Policy Debates Should Not Appear One-Sided (discusses arguments as soldiers)
- Philosophical Landmines
Understanding and being understood:
- Philosophical Landmines – "If something you say makes people go off on a spiral of bad philosophy, don't get annoyed with them, just fix what you say. This is just being a communications consequentialist."
- Responding to a landmine explosion: It may be best to "abort the conversation." Alternatively, a commenter suggests, "stop taking sides and talk about the plus and minuses of each side."
- Off-LW: Be a Communications Consequentialist, Jesse Galef.
- Inferential distance:
- in brief
- Explainers Shoot High. Aim Low! – "we tend to enormously underestimate the effort required to properly explain things."
- Expecting Short Inferential Distances (explaining in evolutionary terms why this is such a problem today)
Biases, heuristics and fallacies that affect communication:
- Illusion of transparency
- Generalizing From One Example (the Typical mind fallacy)
- The Halo Effect – "You should be suspicious if the people you know seem to separate too cleanly into devils and angels."
Disagreeing:
- In brief:
- Better Disagreement (in brief on the wiki: Steel man)
- wikipedia: Principle of charity. Related: Unpopular ideas attract poor advocates: Be charitable
- Off-LW: wikipedia: Ideological Turing Test. First described(?) at http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/06/the_ideological.html by Bryan Caplan. (As Mill states, "He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.") Also see: Noahpinion: Against the Ideological Turing Test. Related: Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Argument
- Better Disagreement
- Dangers of steelmanning / principle of charity
- The noncentral fallacy - the worst argument in the world? (e.g. "Martin Luther King was a criminal!")
Online communication (for further exploration)
- Text-based communication
- Dealing with trolls
Dealing with negative emotions
(Againstness, noticing)
