actively seeking out disconfirming information

(somewhere) he talks about how easy it is to support your ideas, but that people don't try to refute them ^support-not-refute

On page 79 Charles Darwin looked for contradictory evidence that was published and very quickly took notes about it ensuring that he didn't forget, because he was concerned that his confirmation bias would allow for those facts to quickly disappear from his memory ^confirmation-bias

At 38:00 He only wants to take notes on new, surprising things, now. He wants to find the best attack vectors into his existing mental model. ^best-attack-vector-to-existing-mental-model

Curiosity can also totally change my relationship to setbacks. Say I’ve run an experiment, collected the data, done the analysis, and now I’m writing an essay about what I’ve found. Except, halfway through, I notice that one column of the data really doesn’t support the conclusion I’d drawn. Oops. It’s tempting to treat this development as a frustrating impediment—something to be overcome expediently. Of course, that’s exactly the wrong approach, both emotionally and epistemically. Everything becomes much better when I react from curiosity instead: “Oh, wait, wow! Fascinating! What is happening here? What can this teach me? How might this change what I try next?” The same applies to writing. For example, when one topic doesn’t seem to fit a narrative structure, it often feels like a problem I need to “get out of the way”. It’s much better to wonder: “Hm, why do I have this strong instinct that this point’s related? Is there some more powerful unifying theme waiting to be identified here?” ^curiosity-and-setbacks

At 1:26:30 Roger talks about how having a Proto choice, basically here's what I would do right now if I had to make the choice right now, allows you to collect disconfirming evidence. There is a lot of data but it will tune due to debit evidence against or for
...
disconfirming information^proto-choice-is-like-evergreen-note