Scott Alexander explores the concept of hyperstitious slurs, showing how words and actions become offensive through belief, and discusses when to adopt new language norms. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of hyperstitious slurs, which are words or phrases that become offensive primarily because people believe they are offensive. He explains how this process works, using examples like the word 'Jap' and 'Negro'. The post then extends this concept to actions, images, and even facts, showing how they can become signals of offensive intent through similar processes. Scott criticizes the unnecessary creation of new slurs, like banning 'field work' in academia, and discusses his personal approach to adopting new language norms. He suggests joining these cascades about 70% of the way through as a compromise between principle and self-preservation. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander criticizes mainstream media's recent focus on 'coddled' college students in social justice debates, arguing it overlooks more serious issues and reflects a bias towards elite academic perspectives. Longer summary

Scott Alexander expresses concern about the recent mainstream media criticism of social justice movements. He contrasts the issues raised by small bloggers, which focus on bullying and ideological rigidity, with those raised by major media outlets, which tend to focus on college students being 'coddled'. Alexander argues that this media focus is misplaced, overlooking more serious issues while amplifying relatively minor campus disputes. He suggests this bias stems from the media's overrepresentation of elite academic perspectives. Alexander fears that allowing this narrative to dominate could derail more substantive criticism of social justice movements, and sees it as indicative of a broader problem of academia's outsized influence on media and politics. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews the psychiatric medication information site crazymeds.us, praising its quality but explaining why he can't recommend it to patients due to potential offense. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the website crazymeds.us, praising its accurate, readable, and humorous descriptions of psychiatric medications. He compares it favorably to more official sources like drugs.com, which often provide overwhelming and unhelpful information. Despite its quality, Scott explains why he can't recommend it to patients, citing concerns about its potentially offensive name and content. He explores the concept of 'negative selection' in medicine and how it affects his decision-making. The post concludes by reflecting on the trade-offs between effectiveness and political correctness in medical communication. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines the process of 'crystallizing patterns' in thinking, discussing its benefits and potential pitfalls across various domains. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'crystallizing patterns' in thinking, using examples from the Less Wrong sequences and C.S. Lewis's writings. He discusses how naming and defining patterns can make them easier to recognize and think about, potentially changing how people view certain issues. The post examines whether this process can ever be wrong or counterproductive, concluding that while it can sometimes be misleading, it's generally beneficial if done carefully. Scott uses various examples to illustrate his points, including political correctness, mainstream media, and religious concepts. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander responds to an essay about trigger warnings in rationalist spaces, arguing that the community's purpose is dispassionate discussion and that everyone, not just marginalized groups, has triggers. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to an essay by Apophemi about trigger warnings and discourse in the rationalist community. He argues that the rationalist community is already a 'safe space' for people who want to discuss ideas dispassionately, and that trying to make it safe for everyone would fundamentally change its nature. He shares his own experiences of being triggered by social justice rhetoric, and suggests that everyone has triggers, not just marginalized groups. Scott also discusses issues around language use, slurs, and political correctness, arguing that context and intent matter when determining what language is harmful. Shorter summary