That weird obsession with decision-making.pic.twitter.com/4odgISsJpz
-
It doesn't seem straightforward that pointing out a gap in R leads to filling that gap in R. Perhaps we need to be more specific about a time when this happened or didn't happen.
I was operating under the assumption that as soon as you point out a gap, it creates the ability to choose between "keeping the gap" or "filling/fixing the gap," in which case R's got you covered
-
-
I feel like that's a rationalist assumption that some meta-rationalists would object to. For example, in
@everytstudies's analysis of the Klein-Harris disagreement, he points out the gap between their value systems, but seeing the gap doesn't bridge it. -
not that the gap gets automagically bridged! just that pointing out a gap brings in the rationalist apparatus, i.e., to conceive of it as a decision (keep doing what’s being flagged as suboptimal vs. try to change) and apply explicit reasoning
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.