Author - you were never in love with rational thought. You were in love with some individuals. When those individuals proved human, you decided the problem was the principles of rationality.
Part of being rational is knowing and accepting that all humans can and will be irrational at times. We all suffer from the 'human condition.
You don’t need to give up on being rational. You need to double down on it.
I completely agree… that’s a way of restating the point I was trying to make. Author didn’t align on being rational. They hitched their wagon to some rationalists and then found out they are flawed which left them disillusioned.
It sure would be awkward for your whole argument/condescending rant if the author and headlines said the rationalist community the whole time instead of rationalism.
The whole point - that you seem adamant to avoid - is who gives a flying fuck about ‘the rationalist community’. Why is the author writing about it at all? (There is an answer to this, but you’re not interested in that.)
They also conveniently make sure to migrate their smear from just ‘the rationalist community’ to be ‘the skeptic community’. Of course, they never really define either, so it’s conveniently guilt by association for any one rational or skeptical. And it works! Here you are jumping on their bandwagon, smugly proclaiming how fucking smart and better you are, even though your main contention was patently false.
Author - you were never in love with rational thought. You were in love with some individuals. When those individuals proved human, you decided the problem was the principles of rationality.
Part of being rational is knowing and accepting that all humans can and will be irrational at times. We all suffer from the 'human condition.
You don’t need to give up on being rational. You need to double down on it.
Being rational and aligning with the rationalist community are not the same things.
I completely agree… that’s a way of restating the point I was trying to make. Author didn’t align on being rational. They hitched their wagon to some rationalists and then found out they are flawed which left them disillusioned.
It sure would be awkward for your whole argument/condescending rant if the author and headlines said the rationalist community the whole time instead of rationalism.
The whole point - that you seem adamant to avoid - is who gives a flying fuck about ‘the rationalist community’. Why is the author writing about it at all? (There is an answer to this, but you’re not interested in that.)
They also conveniently make sure to migrate their smear from just ‘the rationalist community’ to be ‘the skeptic community’. Of course, they never really define either, so it’s conveniently guilt by association for any one rational or skeptical. And it works! Here you are jumping on their bandwagon, smugly proclaiming how fucking smart and better you are, even though your main contention was patently false.