I am sorry that you cannot see it, and I am not sure if I can help you. I have failed to make myself understood to you in the past, and I have not yet figured out where our respective modes of making sense of the universe diverge.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
In this case I think you’re actually wrong, it’s not a divergence, it’s a disagreement. I understand what your position is, I just don’t think it is correct
And it’s not just you and me, there are 2 entire tribes divided by this question.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
That is hard to say for me! Many of the deep, insightful things you say and that appear to be working and useful for you don't seem to work in my own system. I probably need refutations from folks that use a demonstrably compatible ontology. You could try with a detailed message.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I mean specifically on this question of consciousness as 2nd order simulation. Other stuff, sure we diverge. I’m all for Divergentism. Neurodiversity ftw and everybody doesn’t have to process things the same way. I think I understand, and am understood by, about 10% of minds,.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
That is not a bad quota for someone who thinks a lot. I suspect that you focus on being a publicist more than on being a philosopher?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @vgr
That was not my intention. I am not prescriptive, I am just trying to understand your motivation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I noticed that I prize meaning over relevance. Relevance is backed up by the promise of an actual, material reward. Since I don't seem to see the value of actual rewards (why should I strive for them?), I appear to need a transcendental, terminal reward anticipation.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
From my perspective, your thinking often appears to stop two steps before the actual summit, and then take off in a different direction. That does not mean that this is objectively true, but perhaps that I measure the height of the reward landscape differently.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I’m fine with that perception of my behavior/thinking
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
That is both pleasing and disturbing to me, naturally.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
It is empirically accurate, modulo a sort of optical illusion that doesn’t matter, and a bit of projection, which is 10x better than most people ever understand anyone. You’d be able to predict my actions pretty well with that model. Probably only need a small shell script
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
Oh, no! That was not an understanding of how you operate, only a characterization of the observation, which results from projecting your actions on my own surface. I don't yet see WHY you seem to stop and deviate, for which I possibly need a meta-perspective.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes - 12 more replies
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.
