X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=content%2Fdrafts%2Fa-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md;h=9eab8be759be4e3fe398816a4cc9ad2318a2cf0f;hb=0a8e087760b1b27b632fca68ba28bb2f21df8de2;hp=125a2e7c041dd510930bc7c6132e4b6f88511d38;hpb=3f505f984fd4e0cd99c19868282eaa8762a83cd2;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git

diff --git a/content/drafts/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md b/content/drafts/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
index 125a2e7..9eab8be 100644
--- a/content/drafts/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
+++ b/content/drafts/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
@@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ The other year, Alexander had written a post, ["Kolmogorov Complicity and the Pa
 
 It was the same thing here. It wasn't that I had any direct practical need to misgender anyone in particular. It still wasn't okay that trying to talk about the reality of biological sex to so-called "rationalists" gets you an endless deluge of—polite! charitable! non-ostracism-threatening!—_bullshit nitpicking_. (What about complete androgen insensitivity syndrome? Why doesn't this ludicrous misinterpretation of what you said imply that lesbians aren't women? _&c. ad infinitum_.) With enough time, I thought the nitpicks can and should be satisfactorily answered. (Any ones that couldn't would presumably fatal criticisms rather than bullshit nitpicks.) But while I was in the process of continuing to write all that up, I hoped Alexander could see why I feel somewhat gaslighted.
 
-(I had been told by others that I wasn't using the word "gaslighting" correctly. _Somehow_ no one seemed to think I had the right to define that category boundary however I want.)
+(I had been told by others that I wasn't using the word "gaslighting" correctly. _Somehow_ no one seemed to think I had the right to define _that_ category boundary for my convenience.)
 
 If our vaunted rationality techniques result in me having to spend dozens of hours patiently explaining why I don't think that I'm a woman and that [the person in this photograph](https://daniellemuscato.startlogic.com/uploads/3/4/9/3/34938114/2249042_orig.jpg) isn't a woman, either (where "isn't a woman" is a _convenient rhetorical shorthand_ for a much longer statement about [naïve Bayes models](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/gDWvLicHhcMfGmwaK/conditional-independence-and-naive-bayes) and [high-dimensional configuration spaces](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WBw8dDkAWohFjWQSk/the-cluster-structure-of-thingspace) and [defensible Schelling points for social norms](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Kbm6QnJv9dgWsPHQP/schelling-fences-on-slippery-slopes)), then our techniques are _worse than useless_.
 
@@ -211,10 +211,54 @@ Back in 2010, the rationalist community had a shared understanding that the func
 ... Scott didn't get it.
 
 [TODO:
-Soon, other conversations continued with Michael and Sarah and Ben, and Anna
+ * Soon, other conversations continued with Michael and Sarah and Ben—and with Anna
+Michael sees a world of gaslighting and complicity
 ]
 
 
+[TODO:
+on ostracism—
+ * There's a view that says, as long as everyone is being polite, there's no problem
+ * I think there's a problem where the collective discourse is biased, even if it's surface-level polite
+ * Berkley rats are very good at not being persecutory (we might not have been if Scott hadn't a traumatizing social-justice-shaming experience in college)
+]
+
+
+[TODO:
+ * Ben thought the bullshit nitpicking was meaningfully anti-epistemic: the game is that I have to choose between infinite interpretive labor, or being cast as "never having answered these construed-as-reasonable objections
+ * I was inclined to meet the objections, to say, "well, I guess I need to write faster and more clearly" rather than "you're dishonestly demanding arbitrarily large amounts of interpretive labor from me"; by meeting the objections I become a stronger writer
+ * Ben thought that being a better writer by responding to nitpicks from people who are trying not to understand was a boring goal; it would be a better use of my talents to explain how people were failing to engage, rather than continuing to press the object-level itself—like, I had a model of "the rationalists" that keeps making bad predictions, what's going on there?
+ * I guess I'm only now, years later, taking Ben's advice on this. Sorry, Ben.
+]
+
+
+[TODO:
+ * If we have this entire posse, I feel bad/guilty/ashamed about focusing too much on my special interest except insofar as it's actually a proxy for "has Eliezer and/or everyone else [lost the plot](https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2017/08/12/what-is-rationalist-berkleys-community-culture/), and if so, how do we get it back?" 
+ * There have been times when I thought, "What the Hell am I doing?" [...]
+]
+
+[TODO:
+ * Anna and intellectual property
+]
+
+[TODO: RIP Culture War thread, defense against alt-right categorization
+ * "the degree to which category boundaries are being made a conscious and deliberate focus of discussion": it's a problem when category boundaries are being made a conscious and deliberate focus of discussion as an isolated-demand-for-rigor because people can't get the conclusion they want on the merits; I only started focusing on the hidden-Bayesian-structure-of-cognition part after the autogynephilia discussions kept getting derailed 
+]
+
+[TODO: relying on Michael too much; I'm not crazy
+ * This may have been less effective than it was in my head; I _remembered_ Michael as being high-status
+ * "I should have noticed earlier that my emotional dependence on "Michael says X" validation is self-undermining, because Michael says that the thing that makes me valuable is my ability to think independently."
+ * fairly destructive move
+* _Everyone got it wrong_. there was a comment on /r/slatestarcodex the other week that cited Scott, Eliezer, Ozy, Kelsey, and Rob as leaders of rationalist movement. https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/anvwr8/experts_in_any_given_field_how_would_you_say_the/eg1ga9a/
+]
+
+[TODO: on private universes
+
+]
+
+
+
+
 [TODO: ... continue translating email analysis into prose]
 
 [TODO: proton concession]