There is a pervasive pattern of discussion about “rationalism” versus “post-rationalism” versus “meta-rationalism” and various other ways of trying to carve reasoning up into movements or communities or ideologies. This is all a mistake.
-
-
“Post-rational” was the slogan of some members of the Berkeley/LW “rationalist” subculture who were disenchanted with some aspects of it. I was never part of that, and only address it in passing. My critique addresses much more mainstream ideas.https://twitter.com/RealtimeAI/status/1158425139421360129 …
-
“Meta-rationality” is a term I coined for a particular type of reasoning. This type of reasoning would count as rational by the definition “likely to be effective.” It does not reject rationality. It is, however, quite *different from* formal/technical/systematic rationality.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That’s one’s good. I like where you’re going. But I still think the adoption of the psych categories is unnecessary. It’s better to just call limited viewpoints irrational, and say we have reasons to abandon or expand them.
-
I think it’s helpful to distinguish specific sorts of irrationality. There is one specific sort that I call “rationalism,” which consists of making strong, false claims about the efficacy of formal rationality. A better term for that would be great, if you can think of one!
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thank you
@Meaningness. I’m collecting all these posts—people keep referring me back to you!—and I will read them with interest.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.