Choosing Actions for Impact

1min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Actions that boost identity but do not contribute positively, like arguing online or putting bumper stickers on cars, are not helpful. Attacking groups similar to yours with slight differences is also counterproductive. Holding your identity lightly can steer you away from such actions and towards impactful activities. For example, the Humane League shifted its focus from targeting scientists to advocating for farm animal welfare due to the larger impact they could make.

Mom, apple pie, and rationality — all things that are unquestionably good, right? But rationality, as much as we might value it, is easier to aspire to than to achieve. And there are more than a few hot takes on the market suggesting that we shouldn’t even want to be rational — that it’s inefficient or maladaptive. Julia Galef is here to both stand up for the value of being rational, and to explain how we can better achieve it. She distinguishes between the “soldier mindset,” where we believe what we’re told about the world and march toward a goal, and the “scout mindset,” where we’re open-minded about what’s out there and always asking questions. She makes a compelling case that all things considered, it’s better to be a scout.

Support Mindscape on Patreon.

Julia Galef received a BA in statistics from Columbia University. She is currently a writer and host of the Rationally Speaking podcast. She was a co-founder and president of the Center for Applied Rationality. Her new book is The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.