Eldar Sarajlic

@megha_lilly Not in how I write for children today: a.co/d/06f9vMZj

Children's literature contains writing that presumes its reader is mentally challenged. An idiot. And that is what they become. Pick up any children's book before the 1950s and the writers had far more respect for their little readers (and listeners).

@gregorykennedy @AdamSinger Oh man, the hole is much deeper, isn’t it? 😀

@think___y @AdamSinger He is not an economist. That's another lie.

The problem with leftists is they constantly lie. And their top voices never respond to feedback and are unwilling to update beliefs to fit reality. It's such an extremely bad faith group of people, how do you have discourse with them when they're so dishonest and manipulative?

@cafreiman Yeah, if only these people thought critically instead of ideologically. No argument matters here: policies are downstream of ideology for these guys.

It’s hard not to think that educational outcomes would improve if each pupil simply had $44k to choose among private schools competing for those dollars.

@AdamSinger Yeah, I forgot to add: a government official! Truly astounding.

@think___y Also same guy who blocks new housing being built in his neighborhood, really a champion of the people

@richmondie Oh, if you remember the title please share!

@think___y I read a book for children a bit like that years ago - it was green! I mean I can't remember title or author and I'd love to read it again. Explained extrapolation, and flip-flop situations among lots else.

Can you teach a 10-yr old probability theory? I took this challenge upon myself, and I am writing a textbook that will do so. My idea is to help kids develop statistical intuitions that will power their critical thinking years down the road.

@richmondie Thanks! It’s part of a broader curriculum, and when available (by the end of the summer, hopefully) it will be available here: schoolofcriticalthinking.org/families/

@think___y I'd read that!

But the million-dollar question here is: why have they done that? Why hasn’t the enduring message of this literature remained strong? How do you retreat to skepticism and relativism after Michelangelo? Perhaps the way it was taught never focused on the core of it, but mostly on the surface?

The humanities should teach us to revere the glories of the West: Shakespeare, Beethoven, Michelangelo, Milton, Eliot. Instead, they teach skepticism, even hatred, of the West. They replace genius with mediocrity in the name of diversity. Thus, they deserve to die.

I blame education, partly, for that, because it doesn’t explicitly teach students (as kids and teenagers) pattern recognition: the fact that some structures in reality never (or rarely) change while others do. Weirdly, I think the age of AI is a perfect moment to start doing that more systematically.

I work w a lot of large families w multigenerational wealth. They often ask how to make good decisions when tech is developing so radically fast but human adoption is so unevenly. I think the key is to separate what's accelerating from what's enduring. Tech changes. Human needs - for meaning, for connection, for autonomy, for security - change much less. Build your decisions around the enduring, & adapt the technological layer as it evolves. The mistake is doing the reverse: anchoring to a specific technology and being surprised when human behavior doesn't keep up. We spend way too much time on the 10% - the tools, not enough time thinking abt the 90% - the human - what we want, need, what gives us joy, what we want to protect. The current priorities are backwards.

@timurkuran Exactly. That’s why I rooted how I teach it now in something different: computational thinking.

The humanities were meant to illuminate the human condition and to participate in teaching how to think. They were popular when they delivered. Once they pivoted to social-justice activism, they became useless. Their existential crisis is entirely self-inflicted.

The skill of asking the right question is more important than knowing the right answer. Most education gets this backwards.

@PAHoyeck Motion to adopt the definition as the official one

Philosophy (noun): a psychological condition characterized by the belief that if you just make your argument strong enough, you can persuade others of your views.

Yes, that’s what we need

German language has an amazing word for someone who's a specialist in a narrow domain, but ignorant otherwise: Fachidiot. I see so many folks like these, and my heart aches. The best way to thrive as a thinker in the age of AI is to be a generalist, a polymath.

@rsg Thanks!

@think___y Very well said

Positivity is a habit more than anything And negativity is one of the hardest bad habits to break in adulthood You rarely see a cynic become an optimist. They see their negativity as an objective lens on reality rather than an active choice they’re making

@mysteriouskat Yes, and that can’t be changed, unfortunately. It’s a function of general intelligence, and the distribution of it among people is fixed.

A lot of people out in the world are fundementally incurious. A lot of problems would be solved with just a bit more curiosity. Towards others, ideas, history, how things work, etc.

When you’re young, you find it cool to be cynical, anti-this, anti-that. You criticize everything, nothing is good enough for you. This cynicism is often interpreted as an indicator of higher intelligence and discernment, but it’s usually just a cover for cowardice or lack of ambition. I used to believe this when I was young too. I looked upon people I now recognize as losers. I was fortunate to break away from that, but it still haunts me how could I have been so stupid.

@JeremyTate41 I am optimistic too, despite some regrets: x.com/think___y/stat…

I would be super depressed about the future of America if I did not spend so much time around the homeschooling and classical education movements. We have messed things up royally for future generations, but there isn’t anything these young Americans can’t overcome.