How knowledge works:
You start with some existing knowledge (models/traditions/genes/memes).
Some of that contains problems (two parts contradict).
Try a modification to solve it.
Criticise to see if the solution works.
Modify as needed.
New problem.
-
-
in your terms, ontological nebulosity is distinct and prior to epistemic uncertainty; y/n?
- 23 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think the two get confused in CR because it says we could be (and likely are) wrong about any fixed system of rationality. Nebulosity w/r/t any particular construal can then be chalked up to fallibilism. OTOH, this from Popper seems ~consonant with your view.pic.twitter.com/6IzPOPTunx
-
Hmm, I don’t understand this passage—maybe I would need to read more of the preceding
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
So, I am happy with substrate independence, which could be seen as a sort of nebulosity, and also with relative state QM (which is misleadingly called 'Many Worlds' but is nebulous WRT probabilities, but to me ontology is simply the a-priori, and that's precisely what it is.
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.
Where

