If the epistemological possibility of truth is going to be destroyed is it more stoic to complain or not complain?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @0K_ultra
Step 1: Use existing data to reverse engineer the first principles behind behavior, cognition, consciousness Step 2: Forge infinitely many alternate ontologies Step 3: Destroy all original evidence Step 4: The possibility of finding the true etiology of things is 1/inf
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @0K_ultra
Well I mean realistically how many do you need to forge before the entire situation becomes unmanagable. 4?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @0K_ultra
There's infinite room for the unfalsifiable. There's also infinite room for the ontologically superfluous, which may be the same thing. The problem is, once you've introduced the ontologically superfluous and made it credible, what happens? Maybe politics crushes truthseeking.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
It makes a difference for the subjective experiences of, say, people being simulated according to unfalsifiable models.
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.