Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
Meaningness's profile
David Chapman
David Chapman
David Chapman
@Meaningness

Tweets

David Chapman

@Meaningness

Better ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—around problems of meaning and meaninglessness; self and society; ethics, purpose, and value.

meaningness.com/about-my-sites
Joined September 2010

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Julia Galef‏Verified account @juliagalef 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @juliagalef @Meaningness and

      This passage from Luke's summary is similar to what @catherineols and I were trying to say earlier today:pic.twitter.com/lZILQAPaS8

      3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes
    2. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @juliagalef @PereGrimmer and

      Thank you! I will chew on this overnight… My immediate reaction is “yes, this is familiar mainstream stuff, but I don’t think this is quite what the LW-sphere advocates, even taking into account community diversity”—but I need to think that through carefully before saying so!

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    3. Julia Galef‏Verified account @juliagalef 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @PereGrimmer and

      Yeah 99% of the work is figuring out how a human, with a messy human brain, can approximate the normative model. What heuristics work well, in what contexts? When is following explicit rules useful vs. just training your intuition through experience? etc. Lots of diff. ideas here

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    4. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @juliagalef @PereGrimmer and

      Baron’s distinction between “normative” and “prescriptive” is one I haven’t seen before. That seems useful and maybe key. OTOH, if we’re looking for a disagreement crux, it might be whether a normative theory that can’t be achieved, even in principle, is a good thing.

      2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
    5. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @juliagalef and

      But the normative theories have technical uses! Tons of them! All of the coherence theorems! Papers calculating an algorithm's distance from an unreachable optimum! Why wouldn't you just have prescriptions based on the goal of getting closer to unreachable normativity?

      2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
    6. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef and

      Ah! This is very interesting… here you seem to have a “harder” take on rationality than some other people from the LW-derived community I’ve been discussing this with. 1/2

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

      Hard to answer accurately or comprehensibly in 280, but: I think those benefits are rarely (not never, but rarely) useful in practice, and they trade off against other desirable features that are more often useful.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @juliagalef and

      Your position seems to me like saying that if we can't see the shortest path through a maze, then it must have no shortest path or at least the concept of a shortest path must not be useful. Seems useful to me. I don't get your weird ban? What else can be said?

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    9. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef and

      I’m saying that in many/most cases there is no one correct metric, and therefore no shortest path. It’s an ontological objection, not an epistemological one. (Relatedly: I see rationalism as pervasively misunderstanding ontological questions as being epistemological ones.)

      2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
    10. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @juliagalef and

      So relativize the "shortest path" to a metric, like all preference orderings on options are relativized to a utility function. These ideas are technically straightforward, and if somebody manages to shoot themselves in the psychological foot, I would not blame the theory.

      3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef and

      Right: in order to apply any rational method, you first have to fix the ontological parameters (e.g. metric of goodness). My objection to rationalism is that it doesn’t want to look at the “meta-rational” process whereby you make those ontological choices.

      11:06 PM - 7 May 2018
      • 5 Likes
      • Rogs says test everyone Luke Gibson Josh Mize Lochlan Bloom against utopia 🏴
      2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          My objection is not to rationality: if the ontological choices are made effectively, then rational methods are often extraordinarily valuable. Yay science, engineering, medicine, etc!

          1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          My suggestion is that rationality can be made more effective by teaching people that the ontological choices must be made deliberately, not by default, and teaching skills for ontology choice or construction.

          1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes
        4. 10 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky 7 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @juliagalef and

          Choosing the utility function is a different subject matter with different solutions, but here you go: https://arbital.com/p/normative_extrapolated_volition/ …. Or if you want priors, well, that is more complicated but I can't be accused of not mentioning the subject.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 7 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef and

          Priors are an epistemological matter, not an ontological one. A utility function is ontological, I guess… but not at all what I have in mind. Rather: what is the right vocabulary for describing this sort of situation? Where “right” means not “ultimately correct,” but “helpful.”

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 2 more replies

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Imprint
        • Cookies
        • Ads info