I always read it the other way around - a humble acknowledgement that they're still wrong, just less than whatever came before.

It’s smug to say that your group bickering on an Internet forum is “less wrong” than centuries of philosophers and ethicists

You average grad student in physics is less wrong than Newton in physics (he knows about special relativity for example). It’s not "smugness", of course building on the shoulders of those who comes before means building better than them.

But that’s the thing— they are quick to discard those ideas when confronted with the promises of technology and AI. As if glorified Markov chains are somehow going to alter our essential humanity. See the trans-humanists, or that guy who injects his son’s blood.

Ironically, you exemplify the standard of discourse that the rationalist spaces of discussion like lesswrong strives to go above, which is what makes them so valuable.

Loaded question (well, affirmation), on a confident sneery tone while using poorly defined terms ("essential humanity") and very poor comprehension of object-level facts of the ground ("Markov chains"). And no sign of even trying to understand the other side, just trying to score rhetoric points on a internet board.

> Ironically, you exemplify the standard of discourse that the rationalist spaces of discussion like lesswrong strives to go above, which is what makes them so valuable.

I guess I misunderstood then. It’s not just an Internet forum. It’s an internet forum with strict moderators. And it’s _very_ valuable.

They’re really invested in the study of philosophy, epistemology, and ethics and how it applies to their lives, and frequently reference philosophers and ethicists.

Half the time I come across that community online, it’s just love triangles between people with anime profile pictures, “rationalizing” atrocities, and comparing IQ test scores.

I've always understood it as by using principled rationalism, you will become _less wrong_ over time.

With that level of, uh, following implications, "Democrats" are smug because they believe other schools of thoughts are pro-dictatorship, "feminists" are hateful because they believe anyone else is anti-women, "romanticists" are mad because they think everybody else hates love, etc.

It's possible to embrace a label without saying "everybody else is the literal opposite of that label".

In a world where the opponents of the US Democrats have staged a hostile takeover of the government complete with an unelected billionaire performing a Hitler salute and tearing down entire departments, with the president issuing unconstitutional executive orders unpersoning immigrants and trans people, with the benefit of hindsight we now know that their opponents have been manifesting a dictatorship.