i'm talking about people who go around calling themselves "rationalists". In the modern era, that's one group of people.
-
-
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch
Maybe "one group" in the Bay Area. On the rest of the planet, few associate "rationalist" with LW.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenPiment @GrumplessGrinch
And
@Meaningness was pretty clear that he meant rationalists in general.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenPiment @Meaningness
Who are these rationalists in general? Name one or three?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch @StephenPiment
Bertrand Russell; Daniel Dennett; Noam Chomsky; John Rawls. (More on request :)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
… and by “meta-rationalists” I mean Heidegger, Wiitgenstein, Kuhn. IOW, this is not about us. It’s big stuff.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @GrumplessGrinch
I find Imre Lakatos (in his work on "research programs") to be an interesting case.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I would call him a meta-rationalist, albeit one with a particular interest in how science works when it works well.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenPiment @GrumplessGrinch
I haven’t actually read him but that seems right from summaries I have read. He was massively influenced by Kuhn, I gather.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I’d also list Feynman as unambiguously a meta-rationalist, in his discussions of how science actually works.
2 replies 2 retweets 4 likes
Last chapter of The Character of Physical Law is a great example of this imo, just been rereading it
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.