i absolutely concur that the methods of rationality are indispensable for analytic purposes. but one interesting tidbit is that if preference is only permitted at the beginning or end of the process, that allows very acute preference falsification pressure to be brought to bear
-
-
Replying to @TWakalix @ThePatanoiac
"bottleneck" is a good word for it, though idk if you mean the same one i do. if the only time you get to inject your intuition/emotions/aesthetics is in picking axioms or desired outcomes, it'd be irrational not to expect there to be immense pressure to choose the ~right~ ones
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
if you say that morality is absolute and not relative, it suggests that disagreeing with you on a moral matter is like trying to claim that 2 + 2 equals 5
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Robot_Bastard @TWakalix and
if there's a "right" answer, then ipso facto any other answer is wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
(Rationality is universal and objective is a really hard argument to make- what convinces you?)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Everybody is perfectly rational. But, since our weighting of constraints and information is determined by emotion, and emotion differs from person to person and moment to moment, what seems rational to me might seem utterly insane to you...or to me, two seconds later.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
fucking generalized neural nets with component specialized compute modules and multiple types of globally shared state, how the fuck do *they* work
-
-
And I don't wanna talk to a social scientist Y'all motherfuckers got a replication crisis, and getting me pissed.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.