Activity Feed
#4549·Yurii Pytomets revised 9 days agoirrational
What's bad in being irrational? Ration overrated and has pretty indirect relation with the common sense. How rationality will help you to stand the right up, and do the thing? And what if you can't? In general: why not considering each judgement, as a true one? Let's talk about that: each person has it's own experience, which you will never live thru, and from their personal perception of this reality, their point absolutely have right to make sense. Not better, nor worse, then anyone's else. Could you prove that that person actually live in the same world you do? How you can be sure that everything you know make sense, and next moment you will not wake up, saying: what a weird dream I saw! How you would measure a truenesslessnessless, how can you expect that successful strategy will not fail next day? Let's touch the ground for a moment: what we ACTUALLY know about us, and the place where we are? If you like me, you know about this world only two things:
1. the World is such so it's existence, essence, the law, a form of being -- inevitable leads to appearing there of you;
2. and you, wonderfully, has an ability -- to perceive an experience, live thru time and flow of entropy, learn, learn something about your own existence, beingnesslessnessless, learn about limit of own ability to learn -- marvelously comprehend something despite all of that, something, or maybe, at least, one -- for sure -- the World is such the place you know about for sure exactly one thing -- whereinit thisnesslessnesslesssness of is allows to exist in it the you one, who able to perceive and comprehend it. And that's it. Everything behind that -- our imagination. But you are here, and I respect it, and welcoming you. So I'm totally open to trust any story of your own perspective on this journey, because: who I am to judge, what is true. And it's okay for me if you are not or notn't.
3. Because things here always falls into two items: the ones which lands in first or second.
4. And the rest ones.
Ration overrated and has pretty indirect relation with the common sense.
That’s fine. Common sense is often found to be wrong upon closer inspection. It’s rationality that helps us seek truth. Common sense says the sun rotates around the earth; rationality helped us understand why that isn’t the case.
#4609·Yurii Pytomets revised 8 days agoBut you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains are still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). Also, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
pretty often
So not all the time.
#3905·Dennis HackethalOP, 2 months ago@tyler-mills says:
… I’m finding the threads a bit cumbersome to keep track of. Would love an option to have each top level idea in a column, and horizontal scrolling would be fine with me if there are many of them.
Unclear how comments would be rendered.
#3905·Dennis HackethalOP, 2 months ago@tyler-mills says:
… I’m finding the threads a bit cumbersome to keep track of. Would love an option to have each top level idea in a column, and horizontal scrolling would be fine with me if there are many of them.
Not sure this is a good idea. You say you wouldn’t mind horizontal scrolling, but users generally dislike horizontal scroll.
Is all emergence relative? I notice that when a flipbook or a zoetrope gives rise to the perceived motion of still images when they're rapidly changed, that is a result of aliasing on the part of the observer. Is this true in all cases of emergence, perceptual and otherwise..?
Need rate limiting for new users to prevent excessive posting.
#4592·Yurii Pytomets revised 8 days agoEnjoy your crystal clearness. Feel free to remove my account, please, since I see no such option. I see no perspective in communication with ones who found it discomfortable to retrospect frames of own perspective.
I see no perspective in communication with ones who found it discomfortable to retrospect frames of own perspective.
That isn’t what’s happening here. There are dozens of examples on V of me being self-critical.
You’re being passive aggressive, which further sabotages debate. You also ignored my request to take a break for a day or two, and to be less spammy (I just opened V to 16 new notifications from you after a short amount of time), contrary to your own statement that you see no point in discussing with me – which makes no sense.
I’m locking your account for a week. You may return in 7 days. If you then continue disregarding the forum rules, I will ban you permanently. Review them here: #4460
freedom of association
It doesn't appears out of nowhere. Freedom is the consequence of an ability to withstand, the power, resources to elaborate and protect such consensus, and maintain it.
freedom of association
It doesn't appears out of nowhere. Freedom is the consequence of an ability to withstand, the power, resources to elaborate and protect such consensus, and maintain it. If you are ready to pay the price, and have the resources.
#4588·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days agoIf rationality and peace required unlimited resources and time, you’d be at war all the time, because resources and time are always limited. But you’re not at war all the time. So rationality and peace can’t require unlimited resources and time.
They require things like openness to debate, creativity, freedom of association, etc.
freedom of association
It doesn't appears out of nowhere. Freedom is the consequence of an ability to withstand, the power, resources to elaborate and protect such consensus, and maintain it.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). Also, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains are still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). Also, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). Also, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains are real and the space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price to be established, and an infrastructural tax to work.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But anyway, each consensus have cost.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But constrains is still here locally (e.g. limited time and cognitive/computational complexity/energy). And, each consensus have a price.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But anyway, each consensus have cost.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on the perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But anyway, each consensus have cost.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory. But there's, definitely, a threshold, above which cooperation and synergy -- brings more on the long-term perspective, than costs. But anyway, each consensus have cost.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely of available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely on available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory.
#4588·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days agoIf rationality and peace required unlimited resources and time, you’d be at war all the time, because resources and time are always limited. But you’re not at war all the time. So rationality and peace can’t require unlimited resources and time.
They require things like openness to debate, creativity, freedom of association, etc.
But you’re not at war all the time.
It's depend on perspective and viewpoint. We are at war, literally, and pretty often -- figuratively, each of us. So the constrains is real and space for creativity and "freedom" rely of available resources, that would be naïve to ignore them in your theory.
Enjoy your crystal clearness.
Enjoy your crystal clearness. Feel free to remove my account, please, since I see no such option. I see no perspective in communication with ones who found it discomfortable to retrospect frames of own perspective.
#4586·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days agoNo. You’re polluting Veritula with incoherent ramblings. Veritula is meant for serious philosophical work, not navel-gazing.
We have a rule (#4460) against behavior that sabotages debate and progress. Your ramblings are derailing debate. The amount of posts in such a short amount of time is also borderline spammy.
Take a break for a day or two. Be selective about what you respond to. Keep your posts short. And stop rambling.
Enjoy your crystal clearness.
There's a lot of meaning for this word: mathematical (structural), logical induction, epistemological one (anti-unification aka generalization, abduction). BTW it's interesting: how do you see the abduction: do you have a precise definition in mind?
Could you refer something specific for a brief introduction to the Popper's conclusions, which ones most interesting and important from your perspective?
There's a lot of meanings for this word: mathematical (structural), logical induction, epistemological one (anti-unification aka generalization, abduction). BTW it's interesting: how do you see the abduction: do you have a precise definition in mind?
Could you refer something specific for a brief introduction to the Popper's conclusions, which ones most interesting and important from your perspective?
#4584·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days ago[T]here's 4B years of pretty reliable statistics.
This is induction, see Popper.
There's a lot of meaning for this word: mathematical (structural), logical induction, epistemological one (anti-unification aka generalization, abduction). BTW it's interesting: how do you see the abduction: do you have a precise definition in mind?
Could you refer something specific for a brief introduction to the Popper's conclusions, which ones most interesting and important from your perspective?
#4581·Yurii Pytomets, 8 days agoIn an "ideal" world with unlimited sources and time.
Real-world cognition model must handle resource (time, computation, available energy, logistic, complexity, influence) bounds as an explicit manageable constraints, presented for the conscious.
If rationality and peace required unlimited resources and time, you’d be at war all the time, because resources and time are always limited. But you’re not at war all the time. So rationality and peace can’t require unlimited resources and time.
They require things like openness to debate, creativity, freedom of association, etc.
#4585·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days agoThere's nothing bad in death. But that's an existential disaster -- to not live.
Do you not see the blatant contradictions in your own writing?
I haven't advocating the consistency. But could you be more specific, which one?
No. You’re polluting Veritula with incoherent ramblings. Veritula is meant for serious philosophical work, not navel-gazing.
We have a rule (#4460) against behavior that sabotages debate and progress. Your ramblings are derailing debate. The amount of posts in such a short amount of time is also borderline spammy.
Take a break for a day or two. Be selective about what you respond to. Keep your posts short. And stop rambling.