When I was a teenager, my friend and I were building a magic system and got into an extended debate. I wanted the most elegant system possible; something that was beautifully parallel, consistent all the way to the top, fully explained, organized. He wanted something more
-
-
No rule was absolute; nuance was huge; it was not easily understandable, and in this it was closer to a living being. I nowadays try to approach things as a balance between his old view and my old view. When operating with large-scale principles, whether it be economics or
Show this thread -
morality, recognize that they're limited in their use. Reality is not simple, and whatever system you're using to categorize it is necessarily going to miss the nuance and "living-beingness" of what's going on. Ofc I don't mean don't use principle at all - only recognize that
Show this thread -
principles are a necessarily simplifying *tool* that you are using for *specific purposes*, and be prepared to loosen your grip on that tool whenever reality gives you a concept that isn't quite so elegantly manipulated by that tool.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not sure I agree with this part. Simple systems can have very complex dynamics, consider e.g. Go. A conflict between powerful wizards in a hard magic system can be a giant web of counterfactuals, moves, blocks and counters. In a soft system that kind of thing is always an asspull
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.