Conversation

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
QC (in Berlin 7/29-??? w/ COVID 😷)
@QiaochuYuan
seems to me that most of the interesting interpretive work is happening deep in the reader’s unconscious, almost inherently inaccessible to any kind of rationally legible testing framework, and that this is fine and good actually
1
12
QC (in Berlin 7/29-??? w/ COVID 😷)
@QiaochuYuan
also seems to me that the kind of phenomena accessible to exploration via “statistically-significant sample sizes” are the kind where you can assume away differences between people that are exactly the focus of magical or spiritual practice
1
7
NFT profile picture
gingervitiz.eth 🌻
@_gingervitiz
perhaps! it's entirely possible to make that error, but also possible to examine those factors. my question is, if a phenomenon resists any attempt to look straight at it, does it really exist?
1
3
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
QC (in Berlin 7/29-??? w/ COVID 😷)
@QiaochuYuan
here's an analogy: suppose we were discussing ideas about how to have better sex. it's hard to test ideas like that, for a bunch of reasons, not least of which is that knowing that you're having sex as part of an experiment changes how you feel about the sex
1
6
Show replies