We have a ritual around these parts.

Every year, we have ourselves a little argument about the annual LessWrong Review, and whether it's a good use of our time or not.

Every year, we decide it passes the cost-benefit analysis[1].

Oh, also, every[2] year, you do the following:

• Spend 2 weeks nominating the best posts that are at least one year old,
• Spend 4 weeks reviewing and discussing the nominated posts,
• Spend 3 weeks casting your final votes, to decide which posts end up in the "Best of LessWrong 20xx" collection for that year.

Maybe you can tell that I'm one of the more skeptical members of the team, when it comes to the Review.

Nonetheless, I think the Review is probably worth your time, even (or maybe especially) if your time is otherwise highly valuable. I will explain why I think this, then I will tell you which stretch of ditch you're responsible for digging this year.

Are we full of bullshit?

Every serious field of inquiry has some mechanism(s) by which it discourages its participants from huffing their own farts. Fields which have fewer of these mechanisms tend to be correspondingly less attached to reality. The [...]

---

Outline:

(01:07) Are we full of bullshit?

(02:44) Is there gold in them thar hills?

(05:06) The Ask

(05:39) The concrete, minimal Civic Duty actions

(06:16) Bigger Picture

(07:43) How To Dig

The original text contained 7 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.