Something to note: Neither coupling nor uncoupling alone is the correct way to play with ideas. One should first uncouple an idea by holding all variables constant, and then slowly add in the relevant contexts to see how it interacts with the real world. Both are necessary.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There should be a publication for high decouplers

- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A contrary view on this distinction:https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GSz8SrKFfW7fJK2wN/relevance-norms-or-gricean-implicature-queers-the-decoupling …
-
Notice that the examples used are basic statements and not of concepts/ideas. It’s a very weak article and not convincing at all. Anyone can find sentence structures that can question merits of decoupling concept but they are fringe and mostly inapplicable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Fine, but what is meant by "Eugenics" is the attempt to "control" & "select" which "traits" are "desirable". But the problem is genetics/epigenetics are beyond complicated, and any attempt to play God in practice always has some ideology behind it and fails. Thats why its stupid.
-
So its not that you're "wrong" for saying "eugenics is possible", you're just ignorant. It's not possible in the way we want it to be. Dawkins doesn't believe there's a god, so of course he believes "scientific intellect" would be the perfect substitute.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I will copy and paste your tweet in my compendium of worthwhile quotes. Excellent observation.
End of 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.