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. 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
    2. 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
    3. 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
    4. 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.

      2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
    5. 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
    6. 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
    7. Francesca Pallopides‏ @FPallopides 8 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

      I'll do the paranoid thing here and say this sounds like trying to smuggle in pomo-ish ontological relativism through the back door (or meta door, in this case).

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 8 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @FPallopides @ESYudkowsky and

      Yes; the main point of the book is to explain meta-rationality, which is about how to make ontological choices *well*. It’s not relativist at all; quite the opposite.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 8 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @FPallopides and

      It’s specifically meant to help STEM people who have realized that there can be no ultimate foundation to knowledge, and are thereby thrown into pomo-ish nihilism. It gives a STEM-ish answer for how to proceed. This post explains that:https://meaningness.com/metablog/stem-fluidity-bridge …

      1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
    10. Francesca Pallopides‏ @FPallopides 8 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

      Well, that was quite a slam-dunk falsification of my paranoia 😮

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 8 May 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @FPallopides @ESYudkowsky and

      I’m glad! (Feeling paranoid is no fun)

      10:49 AM - 8 May 2018
      • 1 Like
      • Francesca Pallopides
      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        1. New conversation
        2. Francesca Pallopides‏ @FPallopides 10 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          One piece of belated but (I think) important feedback: Reading "A bridge to meta-rationality" & the Kegan model summary post linked from there, I repeatedly caught myself thinking, "uh-huh, true, this feels like my own journey, good to know I'm totes meta-rational". >

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 10 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @FPallopides @ESYudkowsky and

          That’s great! Many readers have the reaction “this is gibberish/obviously wrong.” It’s pretty binary. These pieces definitely do not make all/most readers feel good.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 3 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Derek. JUST "Derek. JUST "Derek. JUST "Derek. JUST‏ @PereGrimmer 8 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          [Hey david - apologies if I asked you this already, but have you read Peirce or other pragmatist writers? Any plans to address meaningness's relation to pragmatism? - I did a google insite search and didn't see the subject addressed on your site, but idk if that still works].

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 8 May 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @PereGrimmer

          I mostly know the pragmatists only from secondary sources. I’ve read small bits here and there. I like what they have to say, and feel broadly aligned with their project. Meaningness isn’t a philosophy book, so it mostly doesn’t do literature review.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 1 more reply

      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