ACX
Against Learning From Dramatic Events
Scott Alexander argues against significantly updating beliefs based on single dramatic events, advocating for consistent policies based on pre-existing probability distributions.
26 min read 3,919 words
A thread through the archive
critical thinking
Essays tagged “critical thinking”. Follow an idea across the archive.
Essays on critical thinking
24 essaysACX
Contra Kavanagh On Fideism
Scott Alexander defends his thorough analysis of ivermectin studies, arguing that dismissing controversial topics without addressing evidence can inadvertently promote conspiracy theories.
23 min read 3,470 words
ACX
The Buying Things From A Store FAQ
Scott Alexander uses a satirical FAQ about stores to illustrate common objections to new institutions, then explains the purpose and offers heuristics for evaluating such criticisms.
9 min read 1,342 words
ACX
Book Review: The Scout Mindset
Scott Alexander reviews 'The Scout Mindset' by Julia Galef, a book on rationality that emphasizes seeking truth over defending beliefs and addresses both intellectual and emotional aspects of clear thinking.
35 min read 5,421 words
SSC
Socratic Grilling
Scott Alexander advocates for 'Socratic grilling' as a valuable learning tool, urging people not to mistake genuine confusion and questioning for arrogance or challenges to authority.
10 min read 1,434 words
SSC
Confirmation Bias As Misfire Of Normal Bayesian Reasoning
Scott Alexander proposes that confirmation bias might be a misapplication of normal Bayesian reasoning rather than a separate cognitive phenomenon.
4 min read 531 words
SSC
Book Review: All Therapy Books
Scott Alexander critiques therapy books, highlighting their exaggerated claims and questioning the validity of their approaches, based on his clinical experience and historical misdiagnoses in psychology.
21 min read 3,193 words
SSC
Adversarial Collaboration Contest 2019
Scott Alexander announces the second Adversarial Collaboration Contest, where people with opposing views collaborate on essays about controversial topics for prizes.
8 min read 1,236 words
SSC
Caution On Bias Arguments
Scott Alexander critiques the use of bias arguments in debates, explaining why they're often counterproductive and suggesting more constructive ways to address bias.
16 min read 2,372 words
SSC
[REPOST] Epistemic Learned Helplessness
Scott Alexander explores 'epistemic learned helplessness', arguing it's often a rational defense against persuasive but false ideas, especially in unfamiliar fields.
10 min read 1,538 words
SSC
Too Many People Dare Call It Conspiracy
Scott Alexander explores the overuse of the term 'conspiracy theory' and provides heuristics for evaluating the plausibility of conspiratorial claims.
19 min read 2,801 words
SSC
Varieties Of Argumentative Experience
Scott Alexander proposes a hierarchy of types of disagreements, from low-level meta-debate to high-level philosophical differences, and discusses how to engage in more productive arguments.
40 min read 6,059 words
SSC
Call For Adversarial Collaborations
Scott Alexander announces a contest for adversarial collaborations, offering prizes for teams who write balanced summaries on controversial topics they disagree about.
7 min read 1,032 words
SSC
College And Critical Thinking
Scott reviews evidence on whether college improves critical thinking, finding modest short-term gains but questioning their long-term persistence.
10 min read 1,459 words
SSC
Cardiologists and Chinese Robbers
The post uses a fabricated narrative about cardiologists to illustrate the Chinese Robber Fallacy and its role in media bias, emphasizing the importance of context in interpreting negative stories about any group.
14 min read 2,078 words
SSC
Debunked And Well-Refuted
Scott criticizes the misuse of terms like 'debunked' in academic and political discourse, arguing for more nuanced examination of studies and their critiques.
14 min read 2,081 words
SSC
Beware The Man Of One Study
Scott Alexander cautions against basing opinions on limited research, using examples from medicine and economics to show how cherry-picking studies can lead to opposing conclusions.
19 min read 2,880 words
SSC
Why I Am Not Rene Descartes
Scott Alexander refutes a blog post criticizing rationalism, arguing it misunderstands the movement and its core values of empiricism, scholarship, and humility.
25 min read 3,775 words
SSC
Beware Isolated Demands For Rigor
Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'isolated demands for rigor' across philosophy, politics, and science, criticizing the selective application of rigorous standards.
18 min read 2,716 words
SSC
The Cowpox of Doubt
Scott argues that focusing on easily debunked fringe beliefs when discussing rationality can be counterproductive, potentially hampering people's ability to doubt their own beliefs and engage in critical thinking.
10 min read 1,427 words
SSC
The Slate Star Codex Political Spectrum Quiz
Scott Alexander creates a political quiz to distinguish between object-level and meta-level thinking, based on consistent application of principles across different scenarios.
10 min read 1,450 words
SSC
List of Reasons Why Gunpowder Treason Should Be Forgot
Scott Alexander lists five reasons why Guy Fawkes Day should be forgotten, demonstrating how easy it is to generate arguments when one puts some thought into it.
1 min read 107 words
SSC
Arguments From My Opponent Believes Something
Scott Alexander outlines and criticizes ten fallacious argument styles that misrepresent an opponent's beliefs, demonstrating how they can be used to unfairly attack any position.
6 min read 806 words
LW
Defense Against The Dark Arts: Case Study #1
Scott identifies five logical fallacies in a popular anecdote about Steve Jobs rejecting Indian spirituality, arguing it succeeded through tribal appeal rather than logical merit, and uses it as a case study for why careful argument analysis must become automatic.
13 min read 1,992 words