Scott Alexander eulogizes Scott Adams (Dilbert creator), analyzing his life as a tension between being a brilliant humorist and desperately wanting to be seen as more, leading through failed business ventures and self-help philosophies to eventual cancellation and death. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reflects on the life and career of Scott Adams (creator of Dilbert), who died of prostate cancer at 68. The post traces Adams' journey from brilliant comic artist to failed businessman, religious philosopher, self-help guru, and ultimately Trump supporter, exploring how his lifelong tension between being genuinely clever and his inability to succeed outside of cartooning drove increasingly desperate attempts to prove himself. Alexander portrays Adams as someone who achieved world-class success in humor but couldn't accept that limitation, leading him through various failed ventures (restaurants, burritos, technology startups) and eventually into right-wing politics and cancellation. Despite the criticism, Alexander acknowledges Adams as a personal influence and teacher, ending with genuine tribute to someone who helped many people even while struggling with his own contradictions. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues for the broader use of guidelines instead of simple recommendations in fields outside medicine, explaining their benefits and why they're underutilized. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the value of guidelines over simple recommendations, using medical guidelines as an example. He argues that guidelines are underappreciated in many fields outside medicine. Guidelines offer multiple recommendations, tailor advice to specific circumstances, acknowledge individual differences, provide criteria for success or failure, and show correlations between options. Scott suggests that experts in fields like nutrition and self-help should create similar guidelines, but notes that doing so might be seen as too strong a claim to authority. He expresses frustration at the lack of such guidelines in areas like dieting, nootropics, and self-help, where they could be particularly useful. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews Jordan Peterson's 'Twelve Rules For Life', finding it surprisingly insightful and impactful despite some philosophical criticisms. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews Jordan Peterson's book 'Twelve Rules For Life', finding it surprisingly good despite initial skepticism. He compares Peterson's writing to C.S. Lewis in its ability to make clichés feel meaningful and impactful. The review analyzes Peterson's ideas about order vs. chaos, his grounding of morality in the alleviation of suffering, and his approach to psychotherapy. While Scott has some criticisms of Peterson's philosophical foundations, he ultimately sees Peterson's work as a positive force, albeit one he's not personally drawn to join. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that many debates are 'bravery debates' where different groups need opposing advice, making it challenging to target advice effectively. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the concept that all debates are essentially 'bravery debates,' where different advice is needed for different groups. He uses several examples to illustrate this point: Ayn Rand's philosophy helping some people overcome excessive self-sacrifice, while others need to be less selfish; atheist memes being helpful for some raised in strict religious environments, while being off-putting to others; and self-help advice that tells some people to be less hard on themselves, while others need to take more responsibility. The post argues that it's difficult to target advice only to those who need it, so debates often involve each side promoting advice that would benefit their own culture or background, unaware that the other side comes from a different context where that advice might be harmful. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critically examines the concept of self-conditioning, expressing skepticism while considering potential benefits and deciding to experiment with the technique. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of self-conditioning, specifically the idea of rewarding oneself to reinforce desired behaviors. He initially expresses skepticism, arguing that such methods are unlikely to work due to the brain's ability to predict rewards and the potential for overjustification. He then explores a modified version involving 'victory gestures' instead of tangible rewards. While still skeptical, Scott acknowledges the potential benefits of immediate reinforcement and the intrinsic nature of the reward. He examines evolutionary arguments against self-reinforcement and discusses the limited available research on 'self-consequation'. Despite his doubts, Scott concludes that he will try the technique due to its low cost and potential high value, while recognizing the need for more research in this area. Shorter summary