• she/her

Principal engineer at Mercury. I've authored the Dhall configuration language, the Haskell for all blog, and countless packages and keynote presentations.

I'm a midwife to the hidden beauty in everything.

💖 @wiredaemon


discord
Gabriella439
discord server
discord.gg/XS5ZDZ8nnp
location
bay area
private page
cohost.org/newmoon

So a few people have asked me about Empty Spaces in some capacity and each time the subject comes up I essentially say the same thing, so I'm collecting my thoughts about it here.

If you've ever used Twitter/Tumblr, especially if you've ever interacted with their post-rationalist scene you might be familiar with some terms floating around from the Empty Spaces pantheon like "angel" or "doll" or "moth".

Now you might be wondering: what exactly is Empty Spaces? If you go to the website you won't get a clear answer (because being legible to others is kinda antithetical to post-rationalists1), but the shortest explanation I can muster is that it's a combination of a website and a community centered around identifying as things that are not people (e.g. "angels", "dolls", and "moths").

So I take no issue with everything that I've described so far. For example, I was pretty adjacent to the post-rationalist scene on Twitter and I think it's fine if this Empty Spaces pantheon resonates with some people and helps them find meaning or make better sense of their lives.

The part I take issue with is that some people seem to want to wield this Empty Spaces pantheon as a golden hammer for understanding everyone and that makes me uncomfortable.

I'll use myself as an example. Sometimes people ask me where I fit within this pantheon (or they go even further and presume where I fit within this pantheon … often incorrectly). The closest section of the pantheon that does an okay job of describing (part of) me is "combat doll" (a.k.a. "battle doll"). But the problem I have with that is:

  • (A) the "combat doll" metaphor is really strained in my case

    There's a lot more to me than that, especially if you go beyond my public persona.

  • (B) the "combat doll" metaphor is not evocative

What I mean by "evocative" is that the combat doll metaphor only makes sense if you already know what it's supposed to mean. Like, if you knew nothing about Empty Spaces and I told you I was a combat doll you'd probably have no clue what I meant unless I first explained what a combat doll is to you.

In contrast, I think a much better metaphor for that same part of me is an "attack dog"; and if I tell someone that I'm an "attack dog" they typically know exactly what that means because it is a much more evocative metaphor. People who hear that can intuit that I like to be sic'ed by my master(s) on enemies (challenging problems).

So I guess what I'm trying to say is: please stop trying to pigeonhole everyone (especially me, please and thank you) into this Empty Spaces pantheon. If some people identify with it, great, but if not it doesn't mean you need to expand the pantheon or whatever to put a label them; just let them pick whatever labels make sense to themselves.


  1. although Empty Spaces is kinda an attempt by post-rationalists to make themselves more legible to others by labeling themselves, which seems antithetical to post-rationalism


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @fullmoon's post:

Thank you for writing this. I always found some of the "broader community around it"... a bit offputting

Like a lot of the stuff actively tries to build these elaborate metaphors and make deeper points in the words of these metaphors. As you said, it's very often unclear what exactly some of it is saying. But further then that, in the discussions online I have seen, these metaphors are used on their own as if they weren't own to the ones using them but instead a concept that was just... universally true. I have seen the attitude of not getting something in Empty Spaces or disagreeing with it to be reduced to having not a deep enough understanding of the metaphors, or making new ones (e.g. expanding the pantheon). It painfully reminded me of religious debates.

Rejecting views that you feel are forced on you and you don't identify with can be liberating. To recontextualize and make things your own empowering. I find that commendable. But to then turn around and inflict your new spirituality onto the world indiscriminately is doing the exact same in my eyes and it always discomforted me.

Which is a shame. There is some writing I did enjoy. I still don't identify with any of the labels as understood there.

🐭We... have very different experiences with ES stuff! (Big Sis Jeanette also had some kind of issues with it, though I can't recall what of the specifics I knew)

🔥🐭I had almost the opposite problem, even. I chanced into the realization that the whole Combat Doll concept fit me, but getting anything more than just the amount I knew in order to realize that was a struggle -- so many people said I had to define it myself, or it was something to subvert or overcome, when I just wanted more than "Is a weapon, not a person." That's a start, but I need to see more to know how to define myself in relationship to the idea and such.

It's definitely not homgenous and there are many incredibly cool entities associated with ES! I guess I just wanted to vent some frustration with a subset probably more on the outskirts that rubbed me the wrong way in a particularly sensitive manner. I will admit: It likely shaped my initial perception of it unfairly!

Everyones experience is different I guess. I don't want to imply in the slightest that I believe ES is categorically, ontologically "bad". Quite the opposite. So, I wish you the best and that you may find what you deem good for you :eggbug:

🐭As someone who found Empty Spaces through being doll-kin, had no idea of the post-rationalist connection, or... any real understanding of what post-rationalist is. Will the link clarify what that is? I skimmed it, and it seemed... confusing. Also stuff from LessWrong always makes me vaguely nervous.