Rationality and Rational fiction.
Double Crux - A Strategy for Resolving Disagreement
Double Crux - A Strategy for Resolving Disagreement
lesswrong.com
Double crux is one of CFAR's newer concepts, and it sounded very useful to me so I thought I'd share!




I'm still reading through the article on my other machine (and would like to return to post my thoughts here later), but I just wanted to express that I'm glad to see someone post in here, as I'd quite forgotten about the community but was really looking forward to learning from it.
You're welcome! I would really like to see more activity in here, too.
(Firstly, this article made me realize the etymological connection between "crucial" and "crux" which is really cool.)
I really liked this. In the past month since election emotions have been running particularly high, I've been trying to more often dip my toes in the communities (on and off Imzy) of people I disagree with so that I can figure out why they believe things that seem so wrong to me. I like how this advises good faith, examining of one's own arguments, understanding that people come to their conclusions for reasons, and that things likely "make sense" from their point of view just as much as they do from yours.
(For instance, if you do believe that life and the soul and personhood begin at conception, then abortion really is a terrible act of murder. I don't follow that line of belief, so abortion isn't a big deal to me--I prioritize the needs of the body the fetus resides in.)
Of course, someone can still be wrong... but this is about actually understanding the individual's reasons for their argument, not laying a trap for how wrong they are.
I think I'll have to read over the article another few times before it completely clicks, but I can imagine conversations I've had in the past that would have benefited from this, so I hope I'll be able to use it in the future.