personal/nunosempere.github.io
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update general-semantics.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Nuño Sempere 2019-08-28 15:33:03 +02:00 committed by GitHub
parent 4e1f4c0c2c
commit 87038e44a4
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 13 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

19
rat/general-semantics.md
View File

@ -1,7 +1,12 @@
# Why did General Semantics fail?
## Why do I care?
Because the purpose of the Institute of General Semantics attracts me: to improve human rationality, and to use that to improve the world.
## What was General Semantics? Why do I care about this question?
General Semantics was, in short, the previous rationality movement. Its purpose was to improve human rationality, and to use that to improve the world. The question interests me because I see certain similarities betwen general semanticists and current rationalists.
## What are some similarities with the current rationalist movement?
Yudkowsky and Korzybski have certain similarities. Both movements have fiction (but the General Semanticists seem to do better in this area, having had Heinlein, A. E. van Vogt, etc.) Both movements have similar goals. CFAR looks similar to the Institute of General Semantics, which also gave workshops. Both movements had similar amount of cognitive power at their disposal, it seems to me.
## Did General Semantics fail?
@ -54,7 +59,12 @@ It seems to me that the basic insights of General Semantics have been found agai
## Cause 8: Not enough money.
There might not have been anything wrong with General Semantics per se. If a random millionaire had given them some money at a crucial moment, they might still be alive and flourishing.
## Are there any superpowers worth stealing?
## Conclusion
Personal curiosity takes me up to here. Even though reverse stupidity is not intelligence, the above are what seem to me to be some potential failure points which the current rationality and effective altruism movements might want to avoid. It might or might not be overkill to hire a historian for a deeper analysis. Additionally, it might or might not be worth it to go fishing for techniques in Korzybski's *Science and Sanity* or in Hayakawa's *Language in Thought and Action*, or to directly ask the IGS for techniques.
## Addendum: Are there any superpowers worth stealing?
WARNING: **THE FOLLOWING IS NOT EXHAUSTIVE. THE FOLLOWING IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE. THE FOLLOWING IS A WORK IN PROGRESS.**
In *Here is something about general Semantics* [Source](https://thisisnotthat.com/tintdocs/HSGS-CN-course.pdf), by Steven Stockdale, among other things a past director of the Institute of General Semantics, he talked about how we perhaps could:
@ -145,6 +155,3 @@ For he is both the marble and the sculptor.
> I am free because I know that I alone
> am morally responsible for everything I do.
> - Robert A. Heinlein
## Conclusion
Personal curiosity takes me up to here. Even though reverse stupidity is not intelligence, the above are what seem to me to be some potential failure points which the current rationality and effective altruism movements might want to avoid. It might or might not be overkill to hire a historian for a deeper analysis. Additionally, it might or might not be worth it to go fishing for techniques in Korzybski's *Science and Sanity* or in Hayakawa's *Language in Thought and Action*, or to directly ask the IGS for techniques.