They don't refer to an objective truth, and only appear relative to a suitable systemic decomposition. You can also say that you are the representative of the set of parasites that have convinced you that they are you.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Does anything other than mathematics refer to an objective truth?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RitaJKing
I suspect that any universe that produces regular patterns must have a ground truth. Embedded observers cannot recognize whether their models match the groundtruth, but they may be able to map the (infinite) space of theories that can explain the observations.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
The anthropologist's dilemma applies equally to the universe in which the observers serve as agents of the cosmos itself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
Fortunately a cosmos with agency is a figment of the imagination of its agents.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @RitaJKing
If we can in principle have no evidence then we must have no confidence. All actions and beliefs based on nonzero confidence in cosmic agency are therefore refering to a fantasy, regardless of the actual groundtruth.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @RitaJKing
Yes, I see it as the ability to define and act on one's goals. Kegan's stages describe a ladder of increasing agency.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I agree with the idea of increasing agency. So much of it is an accident of birth.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Everything is an accident of birth. Us being born into this universe is.
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.