When you encounter an idea, a mediocre, mobilizing question to ask is "what could this be right about?" It's a sort of Miller's Law perspectivism. A sort of constant shifting around trying to move forward. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%27s_law …
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've noted falsificationism for some to lead them to throw out the good with the bad, missing the parts of an idea worth keeping.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Paging
@MeaningnessThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
True critical thought must incorporate the possibility of the limitedness of thought itself. Like chess, it is mostly a game against one’s own errors — which is why it can never be approached by procedure or reduced to mere technique. “Humility is the handmaiden of liminality”
-
H/T
@theneurohacker for that great quote
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I've got a who noted similarly that most real scientific hypothesis are neither falsifiable or verifiable. His take was to build an infinite complexity hierarchy of verification and map it onto topological ideas *static and wails*
Thanks. 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.