Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 25, 2016Good stuff. Wish the argument were recast in intrinsic form that avoids the schema of levels/types and metaness thoQuote TweetDavid Chapman@Meaningness·Jul 25, 2016‽ “A first lesson in meta-rationality”: in a STEM curriculum for cognitive 4→5 transition. http://meaningness.com/metablog/bongard-meta-rationality…2210
David Chapman@Meaningness·Jul 25, 2016Replying to @vgrThank you! I’m not sure what you mean by “intrinsic,” or what that would be in this case?3
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 25, 2016Replying to @Meaningnessdifferential geometry metaphor of the sort I used here. http://ribbonfarm.com/2011/08/19/the-calculus-of-grit/…52
Adam Strandberg@strandbergbio·Jul 25, 2016Replying to @vgr and @Meaningnessthe formulation as Kegan makes it is all about taking what were previously extrinsic variables and making them intrinsic21
Venkatesh Rao@vgrReplying to @strandbergbio and @MeaningnessIt is? The way the levels were described seemed more extrinsic to me. Maybe I'm missing something.5:02 PM · Jul 25, 2016
David Chapman@Meaningness·Jul 25, 2016Replying to @vgrI’m not sure quite how to map the ex/intrinsic distinction here, but think @The_Lagrangian is right for a plausible mapping11