Scott categorizes California's 60 gubernatorial candidates into humorous types rather than covering them individually, from generic top-tier politicians to increasingly bizarre fringe candidates with conspiracy theories, supernatural visions, and incomprehensible platforms.

Scott argues against the concept of "telescopic altruism" - the claim that liberals care more about distant strangers than nearby people - showing that people who care about faraway causes also care about nearby ones, and that compassion is generally correlated across all distances rather than inversely related.

Scott explores the psychology of people who hate pets by comparing their behavior with misophonia, suggesting that everyday annoyances can develop into all-consuming hatreds through rumination and intellectualization.

Scott examines and rejects conflict theory (the idea that political disagreements come from material self-interest), arguing instead that political positions are primarily driven by psychological needs and identity rather than material interests.

Scott Alexander endorses Harris, Oliver, or Stein for the 2024 US presidential election, arguing against Trump's authoritarianism while acknowledging and countering arguments that Democrats may be more subtly authoritarian.

The review critiques Haidt's 'The Righteous Mind', praising its contributions while highlighting flaws in its moral foundations theory and political predictions.

Scott analyzes motivated reasoning as misapplied reinforcement learning, explaining how it might arise from the brain's mixture of reinforceable and non-reinforceable architectures.

Scott proposes that value differences arise from people crystallizing heuristics at different levels, rather than from fundamental, incomprehensible differences in values.

Scott Alexander analyzes SSC survey data to explore the conflict vs. mistake theory distinction in political disagreements, finding that Marxists and the alt-right tend more towards conflict theory than other groups.

Scott Alexander shares and briefly comments on various insightful quotes from Jonathan Haidt's 'The Righteous Mind', covering topics like psychology, politics, and religion.

A collection of interesting links covering various topics from government plots and scientific studies to religious news and technological developments.

Scott explores how innate neurological differences in emotional responses might drive political disagreements, suggesting that people form intuitive reactions first and rationalize them later, making political debate extremely difficult.