Naryan

@HiNaryan

Creating a meta-network of communities that explore the cultivation of wisdom. Building my own ecology of practices, connecting and learning from others. ✌️

Toronto
Vrijeme pridruživanja: kolovoz 2009.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @HiNaryan

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @HiNaryan

  1. 3. velj

    Experimenting with conversational modalities - bringing intellect and feelings together in a structured conversation, while discussing The Meaning Crisis ep 25-27 (where ish gets real). This is my jam.

    Poništi
  2. 2. velj

    How does one retweet an interesting study without summarizing in a way that sounds more general than “Here’s an interesting tidbit of evidence for a particular theory”? This small study is about the comparative attractiveness of friends.

    Poništi
  3. 1. velj

    So excited for this to happen! Two important movements having an important conversation. There is so much potential for learning and connection, yet this dance is not an easy one.

    Poništi
  4. 30. sij

    Language ↔️ thoughts. Simplifying a nuanced thought through blunt words feels like making a sausage out of wagyu. On the flip side, it may also make you more context sensitive 🤷🏻

    Poništi
  5. 30. sij

    From the receiver side, the ability/desire to ‘make sense’ seems important. If I don’t understand why someone is saying something, it’s a cue to look deeper (at the context, at the person, etc), rather than to dismiss them.

    Poništi
  6. 29. sij

    PS: What would have happened if the Aang had stopped after mastering only air bending?

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  7. 29. sij

    Aside: Is it bad twitter etiquette to jump into a conversation to ~agree with the first person before the second has had a chance to respond? I'm really looking forward to following this thread and continue chirping from this peanut gallery!

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  8. 29. sij

    14. The ability to truly try on other systems of thought, and use them to gain new perspectives, has been a richly rewarding experience. Even my system approves 😃👍

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. 29. sij

    13. I'm now noticing an explore vs exploit trade-off here - sticking to the Rationality system is exploiting something I believe is 'optimal'. Trying on other ontological systems is exploratory - it might reveal new ways of knowing, but it takes time/effort.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. 29. sij

    12. The metarational perspective understands how subjective any one pattern of priors is, and asks us to consider a wider range of possible priors. "Under this perspective, what would I consider reasonable?" 🤔

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. 29. sij

    11. As a rationalist, am I privileging my own pattern of priors? 🧐 Yes. And I can describe the algorithms that lead to mathematically optimal priors. 🤩

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. 29. sij

    10. Folks in the Community would have strong priors against anything that seemed "Woo". Folks in the Community would have lower priors in general. Older people naturally seem to have higher priors than young people.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  13. 29. sij

    9. Imagine if whole patterns of priors could be shifted by adopting a different system of belief.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. 29. sij

    8. The 'trustability' of any technique is subjective. When I experiment with new rat. techniques, they aren't scientifically proven, but my priors suggest a reasonable chance they would work. When I subjectively experience them working, I take that as evidence and update

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. 29. sij

    7. Here's the weird thing - my priors on whether or not to trust the experience revealed by these 'alternative' techniques are mostly correlated with my degree of Openness. As my Openness has increased, I've relaxed my priors and I find the techniques more meaningful.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  16. 29. sij

    6. So basically I'm not going to update my mental models here, I'll just keep going with my prior beliefs...

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. 29. sij

    5. Hmmm... the science doesn't test if these techniques reveal truth. They just look at if they make you happier, with mixed results. Some cog sci research corroborates some of the models (in a way), but don't mention the subjective experience part.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. 29. sij

    4. Can I trust these 'non-scientifically-proven' techniques to improve my map of how I think? Rational me: "I have a tool for that, it's called Bayesian probability - show me the evidence for/against this technique, I'll weigh against priors to decide if it's worth considering"

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. 29. sij

    3 But logic & science aren't always great to discover "how I actually think". They provide one system of perspectives on the topic, but to get a 3D view of one's mind, I try psycho-techniques outside of the 'rationality' system (like meditation, bio-emotive, authentic relating).

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  20. 29. sij

    2. The straw-man rationalist part of my brain wants to say "well obviously rationality refers to how we actually think", and then try to use logic and science to discover/describe "how I actually think"

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·