number grammar fix

diff --git a/content/2026/listening-disorders-as-eating-disorders.md b/content/2026/listening-disorders-as-eating-disorders.md
index d76b23f72e173b08564c39f96cf3b7d28929b62f..bff03dcc8bfc465d1002c1497121e827d4b33287 100644 (file)
--- a/content/2026/listening-disorders-as-eating-disorders.md
+++ b/content/2026/listening-disorders-as-eating-disorders.md
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ So, in light of the analogy to my eating disorder, should I be more merciful to
 
 I'm tentatively inclined to continue being unmerciful. The issue is that I just don't think the analogy is that strong in the ways that matter. The analogy is useful for forcing me to confront uncomfortable information about how difficult it is to remediate a particular psychological weakness (aversions to information or foods, respectively). But the analogy doesn't have much to say about the costs of each aversion if left untreated.
 
-I think information aversion is a major if not the primary obstacle to human rationality, on both theoretical and empirical grounds. When people fail to achieve the truth, I think it's usually because they're [avoiding their beliefs' real weak points](https://www.readthesequences.com/Avoiding-Your-Beliefs-Real-Weak-Points), rather than due to an insufficiently nurturing discourse environment. You can't get away avoiding just the information that bother you when the pieces of information that bothers you are threats to your current beliefs (as contrasted to, _e.g._, unrealistic horror movies that you can avoid watching without confusing yourself about the world outside of the movies).
+I think information aversion is a major if not the primary obstacle to human rationality, on both theoretical and empirical grounds. When people fail to achieve the truth, I think it's usually because they're [avoiding their beliefs' real weak points](https://www.readthesequences.com/Avoiding-Your-Beliefs-Real-Weak-Points), rather than due to an insufficiently nurturing discourse environment. You can't get away with avoiding just the information that bothers you when the information that bothers you is threats to your current beliefs (as contrasted to, _e.g._, unrealistic horror movies that you can avoid watching without confusing yourself about the world outside of the movies).
 
 For my food aversion, contrary to popular belief, it actually just doesn't seem like a big deal health-wise, as far as I can tell. (And if it were, it would be only my own concern.) I think I _am_ getting away with just avoiding the food that bothers me. In a way, this is "luck": if the science had come out the other way, I would have to make some tough behavioral changes or face the consequences.