Yes; the tricky bit is to not take tradition as optimal in a sacred way, for all the obvious reasons.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @St_Rev
So the problem spec is to balance tradition with a rational systems view while preserving a conservative bias.
3 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Conservative rational system view is to strongly discount rational system view, for rational systemic reasons.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
Yes; and then the trick is to find a way forward, rather than trying to make tradition itself into ultimate truth.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
But way-forward is a progressive (and gray-tribe) axiom! Conservatism doesn't have to have one.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
I think you are right to correct my diction; but tho they would reject the framing, they need (and lack) a positive
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Ah, this is precisely where NRx foundered, mystically. The positive they need is Gnon, rightly understood.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
I agree, but their characterization of Gnon was a disaster imo
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Yes exactly, it's the 4.5/Chapel Perilous/Abyss trap.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
Am resisting writing a blog post about exactly that, on theory that effort ought to go into the 4.5->5 bridge inste
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
but the 4.5->5 treatment is much more difficult than the 4.5 diagnosis!
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.