maybe some metaphysical answers are that way? you'd judge them by their pleasantness, lucidity, and usefulness as intuition pump
-
-
-
is occam's razor still useful here? is terseness the most desirable quality here? could it be ok to just make shit up?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Multiverses are droguli then, but so are the structures inside of black holes, and even the events happening right now near Alpha Centauri?
-
I just remembered I wrote a similar thing oncehttps://twitter.com/allgebrah/status/647786755601657860 …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
the problem is that epistemology is shaky as it is on things we think exist (problems of induction, simulationism, meaningful language)
-
once one veers into "not even wrong" territory of things that do not affect us, all we can do is accept new axioms to "know" (e.g. theology)
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
You cannot "find" that it exists if it has no causal effect on you. But it might fall out of a modeling function, of course.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
e.g. to suppose your sensory experience is trustworthy. It seems obvious, but there is no explicit disproof of solipsism etc. that I know of
-
moral philosophies depend on axioms too and are probably a better example. Consequentialism & Deontology are based upon unproveable axioms
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah I've heard somewhat (mostly in computer science context w/ fuzzy logic/many-valued logics). W/ belief though I mean irl axioms.
-
I think of theology as being very much like a kind of philosophy where the axiom "God exists" is taken as true & not impossible to dis/prove
End of conversation
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.