My theory (explained upthread) is that this does genuinely dramatically simplify, and thereby clarify, your thinking.
-
-
How would you classify your project(s)? Historical scholarship? Popular critique? Philosophy(???)
-
Self-help for nerds mostly. Some amateur social critique.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I suspect that you - like many other rationalists - don't have enough engagement with philosophy to unequivocally call it all bunk - often this is unknowingly engaging w/ philosophy. Meaningness is great but it IS philosophy.
-
“Philosophy” is not a well defined term, ofc, so whether or not something counts depends on context and purposes. Calling my stuff not-philosophy, even though it overlaps in topics, serves specific well-thought-out purposes (imo)
- 23 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think there's enough different things going on under the heading of philosophy that "philosophy is comprehensively bunk" is hard to justify. There's a lot of bunk philosophy (a lot more than is ideal) but even some of that is useful, and a lot of the rest is pretty good.
-
yeah I have a really hard time stomaching such a statement, because *at the very least*, for people inclined to think about philosophical questions, have these kind of concerns, a certain sort of philosophy can at least dissolve them, assuage your worries, etc
- 18 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wise man (sometimes)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
For my Ph.D. exam in philosophy, I was assigned to read https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Mind-Jaegwon-Kim/dp/0813344581 … . It could be accurately summarized as "300+ pages on why a long list of ideas about the mind is wrong". It was actually a good experience.
-
That sounds like a really useful summary!
End of conversation
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.