Does this guy watch Leo?

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Again, you’re assuming there’s some underlying Platonic idea or truth in what I’m saying, just obscured by my idiosyncratic use of language, which you could uncover through a dialectical process of “clarifying.”

But, as I’ve been saying, the entire point of this “big ass tangent” was to argue why I hold difference as a more fundamental category than identity (or truth, for that matter) - a point I illustrated with several analogies, like the absurdity of asking an artist to clarify their art.

As long as your metaphysics is compatible with clarification, I dont care about any of this.

I dont think you are able to spell out why specifying context is impossible on your view. I also don't think you can spell out why would assuming a platonic idea or truth would be necessary for clarification to be possible.

But go ahead, prove me wrong.

 

[Nilsi]

21 minutes ago, zurew said:

As long as your metaphysics is compatible with clarification, I dont care about any of this.

Oh, so as long as my worldview is compatible with this pet value of yours, I earn the honor of your approval?

21 minutes ago, zurew said:

I dont think you are able to spell out why specifying context is impossible on your view. I also don't think you can spell out why would assuming a platonic idea or truth would be necessary for clarification to be possible.

It’s not a question of impossibility; the kind of communication I'm interested in collapses the moment it tries to deliver a single truth, as if it harbored some underlying identity, or some Platonic idea.

My aim isn’t to communicate a fixed truth, but to generate difference - to open up perspectives, to create new possibilities. And whether or not you’re interested in these perspectives is irrelevant; I do it, above all, for myself, and for the intensification of difference itself.

Edited Sunday at 08:15 PM by Nilsi

[zurew]

Just now, Nilsi said:

It’s not a question of impossibility; the kind of communication I'm interested in collapses the moment it tries to deliver a single truth, as if it harbored some underlying identity, or some Platonic idea.

My aim isn’t to communicate a fixed truth, but to generate and intensify difference - to open up perspectives, to create new possibilities. And whether or not you’re interested in these perspectives is irrelevant; I do it, above all, for myself.

Do you hold the value to get across the meaning that you want, without others misunderstanding you?

[Nilsi]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

Do you hold the value to get across the meaning that you want, without others misunderstanding you?

I couldn't care less. I don’t invest this much effort into thinking just so I can be understood. 

I have no issue communicating in a way others understand. I do it at work (I literally communicate for a living, and I'm highly successful by any standard), in relationships, and in everyday life.

But again, I’m pursuing something sublime in thought - a process that’s ultimately between me and myself. This platform serves as a medium to refine my thinking, to test it against interesting, generally intelligent people, and to stay open to other perspectives. But I’m not about to compromise my pursuit just for a pat on the back.

[zurew]

25 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

This platform serves as a medium to refine my thinking, to test it against interesting, generally intelligent people, and to stay open to other perspectives. But I’m not about to compromise my pursuit just for a pat on the back.

I would personally be more sad and pissed about missing the opportunity for someone intelligent to actually challenge my views than being worried about me spending time clarifying my framework and terms.

There will be probably people on here who can challenge your views in a deep way, but you will probably miss out on it, because you don't want to cuck out with clarifying stuff.

But you know , at the end of the day, you do whatever you want, and thats all good. 

Edited Sunday at 08:53 PM by zurew

[lostingenosmaze]

Why am I still following this thread hoping someone will somehow guide it back to Dan Koe for the past 3 pages 😭😭

[Carl-Richard]

18 hours ago, lostingenosmaze said:

Why am I still following this thread hoping someone will somehow guide it back to Dan Koe for the past 3 pages 😭😭

"Dan Koe is a cool dood". That's about the level of engagement you had before we got the freight train of a substantial discussion. But I apologize :,(

Edited Monday at 03:15 PM by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

Ayo, I just applied the MTS to a macro level theory (about motivation in organisms; Self-determination theory):

Competence: what are the innate competencies of the organism?

Autonomy: how does the organism optimally exercise those competencies?

Belonging: where are the competencies optimally implemented in the physical world?

 

Also, this is a juicy quote from a paper I actually had to read once:

Quote

In recent work in the theoretical foundations of cognitive science, it has become commonplace to separate three distinct levels of analysis of information-processing systems. David Marr (1982) has dubbed the three levels the computational, the algorithmic, and the implementational; Zenon Pylyshyn (1984) calls them the semantic, the syntactic, and the physical; and textbooks in cognitive psychology sometimes call them the levels of content, form, and medium (e.g. Glass, Holyoak, and Santa 1979).

https://www.albany.edu/~ron/papers/marrlevl.html

Edited Monday at 03:08 PM by Carl-Richard

[UnbornTao]

On 11/3/2024 at 0:52 AM, Carl-Richard said:

You dared standing up to Jordan Peterson interviewing himself on his own podcast? 😯 Jking.

I don't get it.

On 11/3/2024 at 0:52 AM, Carl-Richard said:

I understand it's strictly speaking a tangent to the topic (whatever can be said for a topic consisting of a one-sentence question with an obvious answer), but.. the guy literally talked about structure vs. content 🤔

But sure, I can create another topic if I get the urge to dump more paragraphs.

 

On 11/3/2024 at 0:52 AM, Carl-Richard said:

However, imagine somebody posting the topic "does Peter Ralston watch Leo?" and watch it devolve into a discussion on solipsism 😆

Just wait until @Princess Arabia's thread on Healthy Foods turns into a raving discussion on solipsism.

It's fine by me, I just had to be a buzzkill. 

[Princess Arabia]

4 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Just wait until @Princess Arabia's thread on Healthy Foods turns into a raving discussion on solipsism.

It's fine by me, I just had to be a buzzkill. 

I and I alone take oil of oregano to cure my sore throat and food poisoning. How's that, hehe.

[UnbornTao]

On 11/3/2024 at 3:49 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Honestly, just reading some bullet points on tips for academic writing could be sufficient. Our professor gave us this amazing list. I would have to fire it into Google Translate through.

DeepL is what the cool kids use now.

Edited yesterday at 07:40 AM by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

35 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

I and I alone take oil of oregano to cure my sore throat and food poisoning. How's that, hehe.

You can do better  

Edited Tuesday at 01:19 AM by UnbornTao