Scott Alexander discusses how people tend to seek advice that reinforces their existing tendencies and proposes considering the opposite of appealing advice. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the idea that advice is often useful for some people but harmful for others, depending on their natural tendencies. He suggests that people often gravitate towards advice that aligns with their existing inclinations, potentially exacerbating their biases. The post discusses various examples of opposing advice pairs and how different groups promote different sides. Scott proposes the idea of 'advice reversal', where individuals consider doing the opposite of advice they find appealing, as it might be more beneficial for them personally. He concludes with a checklist for when to consider reversing advice. 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