Scott explains why it's important to explicitly acknowledge when you're wrong in an argument before moving on to your next point, rather than just continuing with 'but...' Longer summary

Scott discusses a conversational heuristic about acknowledging when you're wrong before moving on to your next argument. He explains that when someone proves you wrong about something, it's better to explicitly admit the error before continuing the discussion, rather than just moving on to the next point. He illustrates this with examples and argues that this practice helps track how often you're wrong and shows your discussion partner that you're engaging in good faith. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander discusses the problem of overconfidence in probability estimates, arguing that extreme certainty is rarely justified, especially for complex future predictions. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the problem of overconfidence in probability estimates, particularly when people claim to be extremely certain about complex future events. He explains how experiments show that people are often vastly overconfident, even when they claim 99.9999% certainty. Scott argues that extreme confidence is rarely justified, especially for predictions about technological progress or societal changes. He suggests that overconfidence contributes to intolerance and close-mindedness, and that studying history can help reduce overconfidence by showing how often confident predictions have been wrong in the past. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander refutes a blog post criticizing rationalism, arguing it misunderstands the movement and its core values of empiricism, scholarship, and humility. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques a blog post titled 'Why I Am Not A Rationalist' on Almost Diamonds, arguing that it fundamentally misunderstands both classical rationalism (Descartes) and modern rationalism (Yudkowsky). He points out that the blog post accuses rationalists of lacking empiricism, scholarship, and humility, when these are in fact core values of the rationalist movement. Scott provides numerous examples to demonstrate the rationalist community's commitment to these principles. He concludes by explaining why rationality skills are necessary in addition to empirical knowledge, especially when dealing with limited or conflicting information. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander gives a satirical graduation speech questioning the value of formal education and proposing an alternative basic income system, emphasizing kindness and epistemic humility. Longer summary

Scott Alexander delivers a satirical and thought-provoking graduation speech that questions the value of formal education. He compares the conventional path of education and career to an alternative where people receive a basic income instead. The speech critiques the current education system, job market, and societal structures while emphasizing the importance of kindness and epistemic humility. Scott uses humor and irony to challenge graduates' assumptions about their future and the world they're entering. Shorter summary

Scott argues that focusing on easily debunked fringe beliefs when discussing rationality can be counterproductive, potentially hampering people's ability to doubt their own beliefs and engage in critical thinking. Longer summary

Scott Alexander criticizes the tendency to focus on easily debunked fringe beliefs like moon-hoaxing and homeopathy when discussing rationality. He argues that this approach is counterproductive, as it trains people to dismiss opposing views too quickly and lose the ability to doubt their own beliefs. The post suggests that constantly debunking obvious falsehoods can 'inoculate' people against questioning more complex issues, potentially hampering their ability to engage in genuine critical thinking and self-doubt. Scott emphasizes that true rationality involves recognizing one's own potential for error, even in strongly held beliefs. Shorter summary