I’ve heard of the concept of “weirdness points” many times before, but after a bit of searching I can’t find a definitive post describing the concept, so I’ve decided to make one.
As a disclaimer, I don’t think the evidence backing this post is all that strong and I am skeptical, but I do think it’s strong enough to be worth considering, and I’m probably going to make some minor life changes based on it.
Peter Wildeford

All of these statements are from “You have a set amount of ‘weirdness points.’ Spend them wisely.”

The Importance of Weirdness

Weirdness is incredibly important.
If people weren’t willing to deviate from society and hold weird beliefs, we wouldn’t have had the important social movements that ended slavery and pushed back against racism, that created democracy, that expanded social roles for women, and that made the world a better place in numerous other ways.

It is true that important social movements that challenged the status quo and embraced beliefs once considered “weird” or unorthodox were instrumental in effecting positive changes—such as ending slavery, combating racism, establishing democracy, and expanding rights for women.

However, early democratic systems in ancient Athens and other Greek city-states were heavily dependent on the institution of slavery. Many citizens who participated in these democracies owned slaves and benefited from slave labor.

The Overton Window

Joseph Overton theorized that policy develops through six stages:
unthinkable, then radical, then acceptable, then sensible, then popular, then actual policy.
We can see this progression in many policies—consider how same-sex marriage has moved from being seen as merely acceptable to now being actual policy, whereas not long ago it was considered pretty radical.

Note:
Joseph Overton himself did not publish a book on the Overton Window. The concept was developed during his tenure at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a free-market think tank where he worked.

Effective Altruism and Radical Ideas

Some good ideas are currently in the radical range.
Effective altruism is one such collection of beliefs that many typical people would consider pretty radical. Many view donating 3% of their income as a lot, let alone the 10% suggested by Giving What We Can or the 50%+ that some within the community actually donate.

While certain aspects of effective altruism may seem radical—because they challenge conventional ideas around charitable giving—the core principles are based on using evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to help others and ensuring equal consideration for all people. These noble aims are far from radical in motivation, even if the practical recommendations (such as donating a large percentage of income) seem extreme compared to societal norms. In many ways, effective altruism takes the laudable goal of helping others and pushes it to its logical extreme. It exists on a spectrum: one can engage moderately or adopt radical practices in pursuit of its aims. Ultimately, the core tenets are rational; it’s the degree of commitment that may appear radical.

The Social Costs of Weirdness

Weirdness, of course, is a drawback.
People tend to take weird opinions less seriously.

This statement rings true in many cases. There is often a social cost or stigma associated with holding beliefs that deviate too far from societal norms. Consider these key points:

  • Distrust of the Fringe:
    Humans are predisposed to be skeptical of ideas that seem too “weird” or fringe—even if they have merit.

  • Credibility Barriers:
    “Weird” opinions can be immediately dismissed or not given a fair hearing, regardless of their merits.

  • Perceived Lack of Judgment:
    Individuals expressing unconventional views are sometimes seen as irrational or contrarian, rather than having their ideas evaluated objectively.

  • Social Costs:
    Adopting weird ideas can lead to ridicule, ostracization, and damage to one’s reputation or career prospects.

  • Higher Burden of Proof:
    In many disciplines, ideas that deviate significantly from accepted paradigms face much stricter scrutiny before they gain acceptance.

The absurdity heuristic is a real bias: if an idea sounds weird to you, you’re less likely to believe it—even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Social proof matters, too; if fewer people believe something, others are even less inclined to adopt it. Additionally, the halo effect works in reverse: if one part of you seems weird, the rest of you might be judged similarly.

But we can use this knowledge to our advantage.
If we’re “normal” in many ways, our weird beliefs can seem more acceptable. Think of weirdness as a limited currency—you have only a few “weirdness points” to spend, so spend them wisely rather than coming off as a crank.

Actionable Principles

1. Recognize Your Limited “Weirdness Points”

  • Principle:
    You have a finite amount of social weirdness you can display. Trying to convince all your friends to adopt multiple radical ideas at once (e.g., donating 50% of their income, becoming vegan, planning for cryonics, demanding open borders) will likely meet with strong resistance.
  • Pros:
    It acknowledges that people have limited bandwidth for accepting unconventional ideas, so prioritization is essential.
  • Cons:
    This could discourage the promotion of important causes if they are perceived as too “weird,” potentially leading to self-censorship.

2. Spend Your Weirdness Points Effectively

  • Principle:
    Focus on one radical idea at a time if it is likely to have the most impact. For instance, if moving donations to developing world health has a higher overall benefit than advocating for open borders, then prioritize the former.
  • Pros:
    This approach maximizes impact by concentrating effort on the most effective cause.
  • Cons:
    Deciding which cause is most important can be highly subjective, risking the neglect of other significant issues.

3. Clean Up and Look Good

  • Principle:
    While challenging societal norms is important, consider the social cost of your appearance and presentation. If you adopt a very unconventional look (e.g., a guy in a dress or a punk rocker vegan advocate), you might spend your weirdness points fighting lookism instead of promoting your ideas.
  • Pros:
    Conventional appearance can make others more receptive to your unconventional ideas.
  • Cons:
    This may reinforce societal biases and discourage authentic self-expression.

4. Advocate for More “Normal” Policies That Are Nearly as Good

  • Principle:
    Instead of pushing for extremely radical ideas, sometimes it is more effective to support policies that are more mainstream yet still beneficial. For example, while universal basic income might be ideal, reforming existing policies (like the earned income tax credit or zoning laws) could also have a significant impact.
  • Pros:
    This is a pragmatic approach that can yield substantial benefits without alienating people.
  • Cons:
    There is a risk of watering down important causes too much.

5. Use Established Persuasion Techniques

  • Foot-in-the-Door Technique:
    Start with a small request and gradually build up to bigger asks (e.g., encourage small donations before pushing for a pledge).
  • Door-in-the-Face Technique:
    Begin with a large request and then substitute it with a smaller, more acceptable one.
  • Pros:
    These techniques are backed by psychological research and can effectively increase acceptance of larger ideas.

Remarks

1. Scarce Attention

Other people’s attention is a scarce resource.
When engaging with someone who has a large inferential gap, you risk being tuned out if you make too many radical points.
Effective persuasion involves demonstrating openness to being persuaded yourself.
Adopt a dialogue approach rather than a lecturing tone. People respond better when they feel engaged as equals in a two-way conversation.

2. Context Dependence

Different groups have varying perspectives on what is considered “weird.”
For example, a man wearing a dress in public might be seen as unconventional in some circles but celebrated in others.
Tailor your presentation to your audience:

  • If the audience values conformity: Minimize overt weirdness.
  • If the audience values non-conformity: A measured display of weirdness can enhance your credibility.

3. General Perspective

Rephrased in a neutral, third-person tone:
An individual’s self-identification with socially progressive values does not automatically yield a positive perception of all unconventional behaviors. Even in progressive circles, quirky or eccentric presentations can initially undermine credibility until balanced by demonstrable competence and alignment with core values.

4. Earning Social Capital

Within a particular group, one can earn social capital by consistently displaying behaviors aligned with the group’s norms. This goodwill allows for occasional eccentricities without being dismissed outright. However, such allowances are context-specific and may not transfer when interacting with a broader audience.

5. Assertiveness and Persuasion

Many groups that aim to influence societal norms struggle with assertive advocacy. A reluctance to take bold, uncompromising stances can undermine their impact.
In contrast, groups that embrace radical positions (e.g., radical feminism, religious missionaries) often generate greater commitment among their members.
In the modern attention economy, bold and controversial positions can be a powerful asset—even if polarizing—as they help break through the pervasive noise and stimulate broader discourse.