two-types anchor in "... To Make Predictions"

[Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git] / notes / i-tell-myself-notes.txt

diff --git a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt
index 68ac6c1..6cca766 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt
+++ b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt
@@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ I can accept a church community that disagrees on whether evolution is true. (Er
 _everyone else shot first_, and I'm _correct on the merits_
 
 competence forcing conclusions: http://www.sl4.org/archive/0602/13903.html
+https://archive.is/nb5rH
 
 analogy to school
 
@@ -235,8 +236,6 @@ getting a reversal was improbable, but: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/st7DiQP2
 
 TWAW is a positive-valence instance of the worst-argument-in-the-world, but it's still the SAME THING; if you can't see that, you're dumb
 
-[I have seen the destiny of my neurotype, and am putting forth a convulsive effort to wrench it off its path. My weapon is clear writing.](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/i8q4vXestDkGTFwsc/human-evil-and-muddled-thinking)
-
 I just don't _know how_ to tell the true tale of personal heartbreak without expressing some degree of disappointment in some people's characters. It is written that ["almost no one is evil; almost everything is broken."](https://blog.jaibot.com/). And [the _first_ step](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uHYYA32CKgKT3FagE/hold-off-on-proposing-solutions) towards fixing that which is broken, is _describing the problem_.)
 
 The "I can define the word 'woman' any way I want" argument is bullshit. All the actually-smart people know that it's bullshit at _some_ level, perhaps semi-consciously buried under a lot of cognitive dissonance. But it's _socially load-bearing_ bullshit that _not only_ does almost no one have an incentive to correct—