One of the reasons paperwork/any dealings with any sort of impersonal API are so dreadful is that there is no way to add meaning. The game is finite (form filling has less material depth to it, especially when digital) and any counterparty is figuratively or literally robotic.
-
-
I think this is practically a physics-level condition in a complex, autopoietic system. It is maintaining a low-entropy dynamic equilibrium, being alive or something, despite being in dissipative surroundings. Dissipative system like a tornado.
Show this thread -
If you identify "the state of experiencing meaning" with "the state of being a stable dissipative system like a tornado" you can connect up gonzo experiential modes of meaning with contemplative ones.
Show this thread -
Another way to come at this: define problem as "life, the universe, and everything." "Meaning" is a serious, contemplation-first frame for addressing it. "Gonzo" is a crazy, experiential-first frame for addressing it. My "home" frame, humor, messes with boundary between them
Show this thread -
Humor I think is under-appreciated and under-theorized in merely epistemic terms. I've been thinking about this essay for a few days which has some good food for thought beyond epistemic functions of humor (ht
@janedotx).https://epochemagazine.org/what-laughs-at-what-mary-douglas-on-humour-da1529c05da3 …Show this thread -
For eg. This by
@sarahdoingthing is epistemic view of humor "The essence of a joke, in Hurley, Dennett, and Adams’ view, is that the teller of the joke surreptitiously introduces a certain epistemic commitment, and then reveals it to have been mistaken."https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2016/01/07/on-some-possibilities-for-life-as-a-joke/ …Show this thread -
The first link makes the important point that you cannot get at the essence of humor by looking for the essence of jokes. Humor (and this is my gloss on the implication, not the argument in either article) is a posture of being, not doing.
Show this thread -
tldr of this thread... the problem of meaning is a problem of life-force in disguise, and has historically been addressed via one of 3 stances: serious, crazy, and humorous. Meaning-making, gonzo-experiential, and humor. Maps to sorokin's ideational, sensate, idealistic perhaps?
Show this thread -
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.