The confusion

I recently came upon a comment which I believe reflects a persistent confusion among rationalist/EA types. I was reading this post which contains ideas that the other has but doesn't have time to write posts about. One of those relates to the concept of "good faith", labelled "most arguments are not in good faith, of course":

Look, I love good faith discourse (here meaning "conversation in which the primary goal of all participants is to help other participants and onlookers arrive at true beliefs").

The definition given for "good faith discourse" seems incorrect to me, and it's not a close call in my opinion. The level of incorrectness in my view is something like saying "I like people who obey the law (here meaning never committing a social faux pas)". This isn't the first time I have seen someone in this community advance a similar view on the meaning of good/bad faith. For example, this post.

I thought it might be useful to bring this apparent disagreement to the foreground, so I will lay out my belief about what this concept means. I suspect this disagreement may also involve an underlying about what [...]

---

Outline:

(00:11) The confusion

(01:33) My definition

(01:48) General meaning

(01:59) Good faith discourse

(02:25) Evidence

(02:40) Sources

(07:27) Classic usage

(07:36) Good faith errors or mistakes

(09:32) Good faith negotiation

(10:59) Conclusion

---

First published:
April 26th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/usnJtFsJq5seN4aJJ/bad-faith-means-intentionally-misrepresenting-your-beliefs

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

″“Bad faith” means intentionally misrepresenting your beliefs” by TFD

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

″“Bad faith” means intentionally misrepresenting your beliefs” by TFD