Scott didn't want to meet. I considered resorting to the tool of cheerful prices, which I hadn't yet used against Scott—to say, "That's totally understandable! Would a financial incentive change your decision? For a two-hour meeting, I'd be happy to pay up to $4000 to you or your preferred charity. If you don't want the money, then let's table this. I hope you're having a good day." But that seemed sufficiently psychologically coercive and socially weird that I wasn't sure I wanted to go there. On 18 March, I emailed my posse asking what they thought—and then added that maybe they shouldn't reply until Friday, because it was Monday, and I really needed to focus on my dayjob that week.
-This is the part where I began to ... overheat. I tried ("tried") to focus on my dayjob, but I was just _so angry_. Did Scott really not understand the rationality-relevant distinction between "value-dependent categories as a result of caring about predicting different variables" (as explained by the _dagim_/water-dwellers _vs._ fish example in "... Not Man for the Categories") and "value-dependent categories in order to not make my friends sad"? Was he that dumb? Or was it that he was [only](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/30/the-lottery-of-fascinations/) [verbal-smart](https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/31/the-parable-of-the-talents/), and this is the sort of thing that only makes sense if you've ever been good at linear algebra? (Such that the language of "only running your clustering algorithm on the subspace of the configuration space spanned by the variables that are relevant to your decisions" would come naturally.) Did I need to write a post explaining just that one point in mathematical detail, with executable code and a worked example with entropy calculations?
+<a id="overheating"></a>This is the part where I began to ... overheat. I tried ("tried") to focus on my dayjob, but I was just _so angry_. Did Scott really not understand the rationality-relevant distinction between "value-dependent categories as a result of caring about predicting different variables" (as explained by the _dagim_/water-dwellers _vs._ fish example in "... Not Man for the Categories") and "value-dependent categories in order to not make my friends sad"? Was he that dumb? Or was it that he was [only](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/30/the-lottery-of-fascinations/) [verbal-smart](https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/31/the-parable-of-the-talents/), and this is the sort of thing that only makes sense if you've ever been good at linear algebra? (Such that the language of "only running your clustering algorithm on the subspace of the configuration space spanned by the variables that are relevant to your decisions" would come naturally.) Did I need to write a post explaining just that one point in mathematical detail, with executable code and a worked example with entropy calculations?
My dayjob boss made it clear that he was expecting me to have code for my current Jira tickets by noon the next day, so I deceived myself into thinking I could accomplish that by staying at the office late. Maybe I could have caught up, if it were just a matter of the task being slightly harder than anticipated and I weren't psychologically impaired from being hyper-focused on the religious war. The problem was that focus is worth 30 IQ points, and an IQ 100 person _can't do my job_.
But the harm I'm theorizing is _not_ that the child has an intrinsic male identity that requires recognition. (What is an "identity", apart from the ordinary factual belief that one is of a particular sex?) Rather, the concern is that social transition prompts everyone, _including the child themself_, to use their mental models of girls (juvenile female humans) to make (mostly subconscious rather than deliberative) predictions and decisions about the child, which will be a systematically worse statistical fit than their models of boys (juvenile male humans), because the child is, in fact, a boy (juvenile male human), and those miscalibrated predictions and decisions will make the child's life worse in a complicated, illegible way that doesn't necessarily result in the child spontaneously asserting, "I prefer that you call me a boy."
+[TODO: more on path-dependence and nonzero transition costs]
+
Scott Alexander has written about how [concept-shaped holes can be impossible to notice](https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/11/07/concept-shaped-holes-can-be-impossible-to-notice/). In a culture whose [civic religion](https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/07/08/gay-rites-are-civil-rites/) celebrates being trans and denies that gender has truth conditions other than the individual's say-so, there are concept-shaped holes that would make it hard for a kid to notice the hypothesis "I'm having a systematically worse childhood than I otherwise would have because all the grown-ups in my life have agreed I was a girl since I was three years old, even though all of my actual traits are sampled from the joint distribution of juvenile male humans, not juvenile female humans."
The epistemic difficulties extend to grown-ups as well. I think people who are familiar with the relevant scientific literature or come from an older generation should find the story I've laid out above pretty compelling, but the parents are likely to be more skeptical. They _know_ they didn't coach the child to claim to be a girl. On what grounds could a stranger who wasn't there (or a skeptical family friend who sees the kid maybe once a month) assert that subconscious influence must be at work?
For one thing, there may be evidence that the child's information environment did not provide instruction on some of the relevant facts. Suppose that, six months before the child's social transition went down, another friend had reportedly explained to the child that "Some people don't have penises." (Apparently, grown-ups in Berkeley in the current year don't see the need to be any more specific.) But if no one in the child's life has been willing to clarify that girls and women, specifically, are the ones who don't have penises, and that boys and men are the ones who do, the child's statements on the matter may reflect mere confusion rather than a deep-set need.
+[TODO—
+ * Skeptics and supporters are still split about the interpretation of this even after extended debate. The supporter protests that the kid was educated that gender and genitals customarily go together; the kid isn't ignorant that her body will make small gametes. From the skeptic's perspective, this still counts as the child being confused.
+ * Anecdote: caregiver says, Your parents named you this because they took a guess at your gender based on what parts you have
+ * "liking rainbows" response
+ * Ontology education three years later is laudable, but is still a contrast to the old world in which you expect a youth to understand the ontology before consenting to transition.
+]
+
For another thing, from the skeptical family friend's perspective, it's striking how the family and other grown-ups in the child's life seem to treat the child's statements about gender starkly differently than the child's statements about everything else.
Suppose that, around the time of the social transition, the child reportedly responded to "Hey kiddo, I love you" with, "I'm a girl and I'm a vegetarian." In the skeptic's view, both halves of that sentence were probably generated by the same cognitive algorithm—something like, "practice language and be cute to caregivers, making use of themes from the local cultural environment" (where grown-ups in Berkeley talk a lot about gender and animal welfare). In the skeptic's view, if you're not going to change the kid's diet on the basis of the second part, you shouldn't social transition the kid on the basis of the first part.
-----
-There's a dramatic episode that would fit here chronologically if this were an autobiography (which existed to tell my life story), but since this is a topic-focused memoir (which exists because my life happens to contain this Whole Dumb Story which bears on matters of broader interest, even if my life would not otherwise be interesting), I don't want to spend more wordcount than is needed to briefly describe the essentials.
+<a id="a-dramatic-episode-that-would-fit-here-chronologically"></a>There's a dramatic episode that would fit here chronologically if this were an autobiography (which existed to tell my life story), but since this is a topic-focused memoir (which exists because my life happens to contain this Whole Dumb Story which bears on matters of broader interest, even if my life would not otherwise be interesting), I don't want to spend more wordcount than is needed to briefly describe the essentials.
I was charged by members of the extended Michael Vassar–adjacent social circle with the duty of taking care of a mentally-ill person at my house on 18 December 2020. (We did not trust the ordinary psychiatric system to act in patients' interests.) I apparently did a poor job, and ended up saying something callous on the care team group chat after a stressful night, which led to a chaotic day on the nineteenth, and an ugly falling-out between me and the group. The details aren't particularly of public interest.
✓ apply pro edits to pt. 3
✓ address auto edit tier to pt. 3
✓ clear with Alicorn
-- fill in needed pt. 4 sections
-_ send pt. 4 to editors
-_ consult Anna
-_ clear with Steven
+✓ fill in needed pt. 4 sections
+✓ send pt. 4 to editors
+
- rephrase "everyone-yelling operation" in pt. 5
_ rephrase "trans kids on the margin" section: https://luminousalicorn.tumblr.com/post/702114588699820032/what-exactly-are-the-tell-tale-signs-of-a-3-year
-_ clear with Kelsey
_ finish and ship "Reply to Scott on Autogenderphilia"
_ finish and ship "Hrunkner Unnerby"
+
+_ consult Anna
+_ clear with Steven
+_ clear with Kelsey
_ clear with Michael/Ben/Jessica
_ consult Said
_ clear with Ray
_ clear with Ruby
+
_ SHIP PT. 3!!
------------
+
+_ finish pt. 5
+
_ apply red team pt. 4
_ apply pro edit pt. 4
_ apply pro edit pt. 5
_ consult lc
+_ consult David Xu
_ psychiatric disaster private doc
✓ "Common Interest of Many Causes" and "Kolmogorov Complicity" offer directly contradictory strategies
✓ re-check wording of trans-kids-on-the-margin section
_ briefly speculate on causes of brain damage in footnote?
+_ "consensus behavior" anti-school complaint could be stronger
----
_ Ruby fight included ban threat, "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark
_ breakup song
pt. 5 edit tier—
-_ sucking Scott's dick is helpful because he's now the main gateway instead of HPMOR
+✓ sucking Scott's dick is helpful because he's now the main gateway instead of HPMOR
_ Previously-on summary
_ graf about Christiano could use a rewrite
_ Dolphin War: after "never been published", insert "still citing it" graf
_ mention Michael's influence and South Park recs in late 2016?
_ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
_ "List of Lethalities" mentioning quantilizers + https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1301958048911560704 + https://twitter.com/paulfchristiano/status/1301992757007847425
+_ screenshot Xu thread
+
things to discuss with Michael/Ben/Jessica—
_ Anna on Paul Graham
_ Michael's SLAPP against REACH (new)
_ Michael on creepy and crazy men (new)
_ elided Sasha disaster (new)
-_ what should I say to Iceman?
+_ what should I say to Iceman? https://twitter.com/satisfiesvalues/status/1730025195413410129
_ reached out to Garrison Lovely
11/25/2023,118277,545\r
11/26/2023,118277,0\r
11/27/2023,118611,334\r
-11/28/2023,,
\ No newline at end of file
+11/28/2023,119015,404\r
+11/29/2023,119213,198\r
+11/30/2023,119213,0\r
+12/01/2023,,
\ No newline at end of file
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / commitdiff