Yeah. Also Write To Say Stuff Worth Knowing by Robin Hanson.
For me, it boils down to being useful.
For something to be useful, it first has to be true. From there, there's a bunch of different ways for a post to close the gap and be something that I find useful. Maybe it teaches me how to be happy. Maybe it teaches something about rationality. Maybe it teaches me something about how the world works.
When I click "Add Tag", this is what I see:
Then I clicked to show more, because I know there are a lot more tags and want to make sure that if I tag a post it has all of the proper tags (because if I don't it'll be marked as tagged and it's likely that no one will return to it to add the proper tags):
But this view isn't organized well like the concepts portal is (below), so I felt the need to skim through each individual tag, which took a long time. Seems like it'd be a good idea to organize the above view to look more like the below view.
I made this spreadsheet to show the cost and nutrition content per 500 calories of different ingredients if anyone is interested. Eg. brown rice costs $0.29/500 calories and has 8.82 grams of protein per 500 calories.
There are certainly lots of other silly things that are incorrect that people believe. Wikipedia's list of fallacies is a good place to start.
Yeah, I feel the exact same way.
Is there a longer list?
No. He's always been a very sane and intelligent person.
Even if both things are consistent with a broader theory, they still seem like distinct errors. As a different example, "I'll go to hell if I sin" and "Homosexuality is a sin" are both consistent with the broader theory of Christianity, but I think they're still distinct errors.
I don't think it matters too much though. The purpose of establishing them to be distinct errors is to establish that he is deeply confused, but either one of them alone (well, b wouldn't make sense without a) would be more than sufficient, right?
Assuming hypothetically that you do cycle from one life to the next, why also assume that unnaturally extending your current life will negatively interfere with/interrupt the subsequent life?
What indicated to me that he is deeply confused is that he believes a) in an afterlife, and b) that extending this life interrupts subsequent lives, which is related to (a). If it was simply a matter of not valuing a longer life I wouldn't have the same response.
Rafael mentions the issue of lack of imagination, where my friend is worried that you'll eventually learn all you can learn and life will become dull. To me, this indicates confusion, but not the type of deep confusion that would make me sort someone into the stupid bucket.