On your website you say that your goal with this project is to enable people to have their own informed opinion about a book so that they donāt just repeat headlines. This is obviously a good thing, but I was skimming through the list of books and I must admit that for some my first reaction was āok, youāll need to duraniumman that authorās position to make me update my uninformed opinion on that book!ā Of course, it is important to have a strong foundation on which to base a strong disagreement with a view. I am just not sure if I can force myself through it.
What is your view on this: If I rate the chance that my more informed view will be different to my less informed view very low and the chance that the experience will make me angry and sad very high, is it then worth doing?
I want to be able to engage with opinions that I disagree with but for some opinions I find this very challenging. I am often wondering about how hard I should push myself here. Any thoughts on that?
Hi, thanks for your elaborate thoughts! My first reaction/āquestion: Did you start listening to the summaries of some of those books? If so, how was it?
I think itās definitely worth trying, because you might encounter some of those opinions āin the wildā ā perhaps while in conversation with someone else.
On my website, you have full control over how much and how long you immerse yourself in this, which might be harder when youāre in a convo with someone.
Not yet. To give the podcast the best chance, Iāll start with a book summary that I think Iāll enjoy. Once Iāve finished it, Iāll decide how to proceed.
I am not sure what your point is regarding encountering those opinions in the wild. After listening to the book summary, it doesnāt get easier to control how long I immerse myself in this in a conversation. But I donāt think that is what you mean.
I did, but I must confess that it wasnāt for me. For some reason I found it really annoying to hear the two AI voices so often talk about their reactions or how they āfeltā about a particular part of the book. I already find it annoying when humans do that instead of talking about the actual topic but when AIs fake that to appear more human like I find it quite irritating.
On your website you say that your goal with this project is to enable people to have their own informed opinion about a book so that they donāt just repeat headlines. This is obviously a good thing, but I was skimming through the list of books and I must admit that for some my first reaction was āok, youāll need to duraniumman that authorās position to make me update my uninformed opinion on that book!ā Of course, it is important to have a strong foundation on which to base a strong disagreement with a view. I am just not sure if I can force myself through it.
What is your view on this: If I rate the chance that my more informed view will be different to my less informed view very low and the chance that the experience will make me angry and sad very high, is it then worth doing?
I want to be able to engage with opinions that I disagree with but for some opinions I find this very challenging. I am often wondering about how hard I should push myself here. Any thoughts on that?
Hi, thanks for your elaborate thoughts! My first reaction/āquestion: Did you start listening to the summaries of some of those books? If so, how was it?
I think itās definitely worth trying, because you might encounter some of those opinions āin the wildā ā perhaps while in conversation with someone else.
On my website, you have full control over how much and how long you immerse yourself in this, which might be harder when youāre in a convo with someone.
Not yet. To give the podcast the best chance, Iāll start with a book summary that I think Iāll enjoy. Once Iāve finished it, Iāll decide how to proceed.
I am not sure what your point is regarding encountering those opinions in the wild. After listening to the book summary, it doesnāt get easier to control how long I immerse myself in this in a conversation. But I donāt think that is what you mean.
I mean: When you listen to a summary with new and uncomfortable ideas, you can simply click stop. Or jump forward.
When you talk with someone and they present to you new and uncomfortable ideas, you to communicate to them that you donāt want to listen more.
Ok, so your point is that ideas are more uncomfortable when they are new and when I already heard them, Iāll find them less uncomfortable?
I did not think they are not uncomfortable because they are new. I just tried to make sense of your
Since you wrote āforceā, I assumed youād be uncomfortable.
I guess itās most effective now when you just start listening to a likely enjoyable episode, to check if you like the format at all.
Sorry, I meant to write āideas are more uncomfortable when they are newā. Not because.
Yes, that is what I meant.
Iām curious, did you already listen to an enjoyable one?
I did, but I must confess that it wasnāt for me. For some reason I found it really annoying to hear the two AI voices so often talk about their reactions or how they āfeltā about a particular part of the book. I already find it annoying when humans do that instead of talking about the actual topic but when AIs fake that to appear more human like I find it quite irritating.