Scott Alexander discusses reader comments on his post about dating preferences, covering various perspectives and addressing critiques of 'dating docs'. Longer summary

Scott Alexander summarizes and responds to comments on his previous post about dating preferences and 'dating docs'. He covers various perspectives, including those against dating docs, concerns about status signaling, insights from traditional cultures like Orthodox Judaism, research on dating preferences, experiences of people in unusual relationships, reactions to sample dating profiles, and areas where he changed his mind. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that describable dating preferences are valuable, despite studies suggesting otherwise, by pointing out flaws in research and emphasizing real-world evidence. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques studies suggesting that describable preferences are useless in dating, arguing that common sense and empirical evidence show otherwise. He points out flaws in these studies, such as pre-sorted populations and brief evaluation periods, and suggests that while initial attraction might be random, similar interests and personalities likely lead to lasting relationships. Scott also discusses the value of dating profiles and 'dating docs' in conveying subjective preferences that can't be easily quantified in psychological exams. He concludes that for people who believe they can use describable preferences effectively, these tools remain valuable despite average trends in the general population. Shorter summary