have just realized that what this thread did for me was illuminate an elusive Rumsfeldian Unknown Known somehow kicking something over to give me permission to know what i'd always known to wit: affinity > ideologyhttps://twitter.com/eigenrobot/status/1036936775912943616 …
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime
Doesn't it seem like stating this as a general principle is a bit hypocritical (as in when is this sort of principle an ideology) or at least de-emphasizes the actual thought process that should lead to the "affinity" behaviors
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mheintlel
1. no 2. if you're putting affinity behind a 'thought process' that you can analyze, pick apart, judge, and prescribe for people, you've missed the point
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
If you're talking about affinity as a description of some sort of default, sub conscious behavior I'd think there's still post facto reasoning attached to it. Def possible im misreading tho
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mheintel
Chaos Retweeted Chaos
you can attach post facto reasoning to it, and you can even let the post facto reasoning override i don't advise ithttps://twitter.com/chaosprime/status/1158198702445682689 …
Chaos added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime
Gotcha, though I'm not sure about "smarter" Im more keen on "more efficient"
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @chaosprime
I agree, but the difference may be that I think conscious cognition is the more effective bit in certain cases and that the trouble
@eigenrobot was pointing out is more applying the wrong tool than the tool being bad overall1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
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.