Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Should LW have an official list of norms?, published by Ruby on April 25, 2023 on LessWrong.

To get this written and shared quickly, I haven't polished it much and the English/explanation is a little rough. Seemed like the right tradeoff though.

Recently, a few users have written their sense of norms for rationalist discourse, i.e. Basics of Rationalist Discourse and Elements of Rationalist Discourse. There've been a few calls to adopt something like these as site norms for LessWrong.

Doing so seems like it'd provide at least the following benefits:

It's a great onboarding tool for new users to help them understand the site's expectations and what sets it apart from other forums

It provided a recognized standard that both moderators and other users can point to and uphold, e.g. by pointing out instances where someone is failing to live up to one of the norms

Having it be official is a good reminder to all site users to live up to the best kind of discussion

My current feeling is creating some lists as an onboarding tool seems good, but doing anything like declaring a list of Site Norms is fraught.

The True Norm of LessWrong is that with each motion, you should aim towards truth. I think it's actually worth quoting the entire 12th virtue here (emphasis added).

Before these eleven virtues is a virtue which is nameless.

Miyamoto Musashi wrote, in The Book of Five Rings:

The primary thing when you take a sword in your hands is your intention to cut the enemy, whatever the means. Whenever you parry, hit, spring, strike or touch the enemy’s cutting sword, you must cut the enemy in the same movement. It is essential to attain this. If you think only of hitting, springing, striking or touching the enemy, you will not be able actually to cut him. More than anything, you must be thinking of carrying your movement through to cutting him.

Every step of your reasoning must cut through to the correct answer in the same movement. More than anything, you must think of carrying your map through to reflecting the territory.

If you fail to achieve a correct answer, it is futile to protest that you acted with propriety.

How can you improve your conception of rationality? Not by saying to yourself, “It is my duty to be rational.” By this you only enshrine your mistaken conception. Perhaps your conception of rationality is that it is rational to believe the words of the Great Teacher, and the Great Teacher says, “The sky is green,” and you look up at the sky and see blue. If you think, “It may look like the sky is blue, but rationality is to believe the words of the Great Teacher,” you lose a chance to discover your mistake.

Do not ask whether it is “the Way” to do this or that. Ask whether the sky is blue or green. If you speak overmuch of the Way you will not attain it. You may try to name the highest principle with names such as “the map that reflects the territory” or “experience of success and failure” or “Bayesian decision theory.” But perhaps you describe incorrectly the nameless virtue. How will you discover your mistake? Not by comparing your description to itself, but by comparing it to that which you did not name.

If for many years you practice the techniques and submit yourself to strict constraints, it may be that you will glimpse the center. Then you will see how all techniques are one technique, and you will move correctly without feeling constrained. Musashi wrote: “When you appreciate the power of nature, knowing the rhythm of any situation, you will be able to hit the enemy naturally and strike naturally. All this is the Way of the Void.”

If we were to declare site norms, I'd want to do in a way that made it very clear to new users and everyone else that our true underlying commitment was to truth and good decisions, not a particular list of good things to do that we'd w...