Search Ideas
203 ideas match your query.:
Applied Virtues
Curiosity: The drive to find new problems and generate conjectures.
Self-Criticism: The primary tool of intellectual honesty.
Clarity: The virtue of refining thoughts to be less ambiguous and easier to criticise.
Epistemic Humility: The consistent recognition of one's own fallibility.
Thoroughness: The commitment to accounting for all known uncontroverted ideas and pending criticisms that may pertain to the problem at hand. {This seems weak}
Good Faith: The commitment to "steel-manning" ideas and criticisms.
Resilience / Fortitude: The ability to recover from failure and re-apply the process.
Decisiveness: The will to act once a conjecture is provisionally accepted and criticism is exhausted.
Self-Discipline: {This one needs work. I don't understand it well enough to write a good summary.}
Courage: The will to face the potential pains of the epistemic process (facing uncomfortable truths, acting on counter-intuitive conclusions, thinking alone).
Accountability: A social manifestation of integrity; the willingness to "own" the consequences of one's actions.
Reliability: The practice of meeting one's voluntary commitments.
Proportionality: The skill of acting proportionately to a given situation, criticism or event.
Intellectual Impartiality: The skill of separating the content of an idea from its source, allowing criticism to be applied fairly.
Fairness: The consistent application of the same critical standards to all ideas.
Intellectual Patience: The willingness to give a problem the time it needs, rather than using a problematic solution (a solution with pending criticisms). {Okay but what if it is an emergency?}
Foresight & Planning: The application of conjecture and criticism to problems pertaining to future circumstances.
Diligence / Industriousness: The sustained application of effort to the problem-solving process, usually to a particular problem.
Creativity / Ingenuity: The skill of generating novel conjectures and criticisms.
Efficiency: The drive to reduce the work, resources or steps it takes to solve problems.
Resourcefulness: The skill of solving problems within constraints.
Purposefulness: The skill of defining a hierarchy of problems to solve, ensuring one's productive effort is directed at goals worth pursuing.
Focus: The ability to sustain mental effort.
Sharpness: Raw mental processing power.
Energy / Vitality: The capacity to be highly productive, especially over long durations.
Athleticism / Physicality: The capacity of the body to execute actions.
Memory: The ability to store and retrieve important conjectures and criticisms.
Conscientiousness: The opposite of negligence. A commitment to making genuine efforts; not cutting corners.
Excellence: The opposite of mediocrity. Man can go “as high as his ability will carry him” (The Virtue of Selfishness, ch. 12).
Applied Virtues
Curiosity: The drive to find new problems and generate conjectures.
Self-Criticism: The primary tool of intellectual honesty.
Clarity: The virtue of refining thoughts to be less ambiguous and easier to criticise.
Epistemic Humility: The consistent recognition of one's own fallibility.
Thoroughness: The commitment to accounting for all known uncontroverted ideas and pending criticisms that may pertain to the problem at hand. {This seems weak}
Good Faith: The commitment to "steel-manning" ideas and criticisms.
Resilience / Fortitude: The ability to recover from failure and re-apply the process.
Decisiveness: The will to act once a conjecture is provisionally accepted and criticism is exhausted.
Self-Discipline: {This one needs work. I don't understand it well enough to write a good summary.}
Courage: The will to face the potential pains of the epistemic process (facing uncomfortable truths, acting on counter-intuitive conclusions, thinking alone).
Accountability: A social manifestation of integrity; the willingness to "own" the consequences of one's actions.
Reliability: The practice of meeting one's voluntary commitments.
Proportionality: The skill of acting proportionately to a given situation, criticism or event.
Intellectual Impartiality: The skill of separating the content of an idea from its source, allowing criticism to be applied fairly.
Fairness: The consistent application of the same critical standards to all ideas.
Intellectual Patience: The willingness to give a problem the time it needs, rather than using a problematic solution (a solution with pending criticisms). {Okay but what if it is an emergency?}
Foresight & Planning: The application of conjecture and criticism to problems pertaining to future circumstances.
Diligence / Industriousness: The sustained application of effort to the problem-solving process, usually to a particular problem.
Creativity / Ingenuity: The skill of generating novel conjectures and criticisms.
Efficiency: The drive to reduce the work, resources or steps it takes to solve problems.
Resourcefulness: The skill of solving problems within constraints.
Purposefulness: The skill of defining a hierarchy of problems to solve, ensuring one's productive effort is directed at goals worth pursuing.
Focus: The ability to sustain mental effort.
Sharpness: Raw mental processing power.
Energy / Vitality: The capacity to be highly productive, especially over long durations.
Athleticism / Physicality: The capacity of the body to execute actions.
Memory: The ability to store and retrieve important conjectures and criticisms.
Applied Virtues
Curiosity: The drive to find new problems and generate conjectures.
Self-Criticism: The primary tool of intellectual honesty.
Clarity: The virtue of refining thoughts to be less ambiguous and easier to criticise.
Epistemic Humility: The constant recognition of one's own fallibility.
Thoroughness: The commitment to accounting for all known uncontroverted ideas and pending criticisms that may pertain to the problem at hand. {This seems weak}
Good Faith: The commitment to "steel-manning" ideas and criticisms.
Resilience / Fortitude: The ability to recover from failure and re-apply the process.
Decisiveness: The will to act once a conjecture is provisionally accepted and criticism is exhausted.
Self-Discipline: {This one needs work. I don't understand it well enough to write a good summary.}
Courage: The will to face the potential pains of the epistemic process (facing uncomfortable truths, acting on counter-intuitive conclusions, thinking alone).
Accountability: A social manifestation of integrity; the willingness to "own" the consequences of one's actions.
Reliability: The practice of meeting one's voluntary commitments.
Proportionality: The skill of acting proportionately to a given situation, criticism or event.
Intellectual Impartiality: The skill of separating the content of an idea from its source, allowing criticism to be applied fairly.
Fairness: The consistent application of the same critical standards to all ideas.
Intellectual Patience: The willingness to give a problem the time it needs, rather than using a problematic solution (a solution with pending criticisms). {Okay but what if it is an emergency?}
Foresight & Planning: The application of conjecture and criticism to problems pertaining to future circumstances.
Diligence / Industriousness: The sustained application of effort to the problem-solving process, usually to a particular problem.
Creativity / Ingenuity: The skill of generating novel conjectures and criticisms.
Efficiency: The drive to reduce the work, resources or steps it takes to solve problems.
Resourcefulness: The skill of solving problems within constraints.
Purposefulness: The skill of defining a hierarchy of problems to solve, ensuring one's productive effort is directed at goals worth pursuing.
Focus: The ability to sustain mental effort.
Sharpness: Raw mental processing power.
Energy / Vitality: The capacity to be highly productive, especially over long durations.
Athleticism / Physicality: The capacity of the body to execute actions.
Memory: The ability to store and retrieve important conjectures and criticisms.
Core Moral Virtues (influenced by Ayn Rand and CR)
Rationality: The commitment to the ongoing deliberate use of conjecture and criticism.
Honesty: A refusal to evade one's thoughts, a commitment to searching for one's own errors, and a refusal to fake reality to others.
Integrity: The refusal to permit a breach between one's best ideas and one's actions.
Independence: The acceptance of one's own mind as the first and final executor of rationality within their own lives.
Justice: The application of rationality in judging ideas, people, and actions and acting on those evaluations proportionately.
Productiveness: The application of rationality to sustaining and improving one's life and circumstances.
Pride: An insatiable drive to find and fix errors in one's character, knowledge, and creations. “Moral Ambitiousness” as Ayn Rand puts it.
Please add a ‘first, previous, next, last’ navigation thing to the top of the activity feed page and similar pages. Currently I need to scroll to the bottom to go to a different page.
Practicing remembering the homes of everything requires that I have something external to refer to correct mistakes when I make them, so this doesn’t defeat the potential need for a list or something of the sort.
I have a poor memory relating to keeping what things I actually have, and it won’t help if I also have to remember where everything lives.
Should I write down a list of all permanent items and their homes? Ideally I wouldn’t need to do that.
Just automatise it. Putting things in the right place is a fairly straightforward thing to practice, and there is no reason you couldn’t automatise the homes of all your things.
Grouping items by category goes a long way in reducing what needs to be remembered. I don’t need to remember where every sock goes because the simple algorithm “if sock: put in sock drawer” takes care of all socks.
I have a poor memory relating to keeping track of items, and it won’t help if I also have to remember where everything lives.
Should I write down a list of all permanent items and their homes? Ideally I wouldn’t need to do that.
I noticed today that things in my shared spaces have better defined homes than the things in my private spaces, in the sense of #2840. ‘Relationship maintenance ‘may only be a trivial factor compared to what I describe in #2840.
I’ll test giving everything in my private spaces a dedicated home. From there it should be easier to understand how important ‘relationship maintenance’ is as a factor in my unconscious and inexplicit motivations for tidying up.
I noticed today that things in my shared spaces have better defined homes than the things in my private spaces, in the sense of #2840. Relationship maintenance may be a factor, it might be a trivial factor compared to what I describe in #2840.
I’ll test giving everything in my private spaces a dedicated home. From there it should be easier to understand how important ‘relationship maintenance’ is as a factor in my unconscious and inexplicit motivations for tidying up.
This would work well for some open threads, but not others (like anything I have left unaddressed on Veritula).
Closing threads is a common problem in my life. I should look for ways to increase my propensity to resolve/finish things I start.
The solution needs to allow for the fact that not everything needs to be resolved, that having some open threads is inevitable, and that some of those threads are acceptable to leave open indefinitely.
Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
This is ambiguous. To be clear, are you asking if I would like to make an explicit personal methodology for using the site, as part of my effort described in #2899? Or are you inviting me to formulate an explicit methodology for users of Veritula in general? (I realise these aren’t mutually exclusive.)
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.
I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.
For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.
I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.
For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.
Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.
The Open Society
The concept of an 'Open Society' is central to the political philosophy of Critical Rationalism, detailed by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies. An open society is characterized by individualism, where personal choice and responsibility are paramount, in contrast to a closed society (e.g., tribal or collectivist) which demands the subordination of the individual to the group. It replaces the justificationist political question, "Who should rule?", with the fallibilist question: "How can we structure our institutions so that we can remove bad rulers and bad policies without violence?". In this view, democracy is not "rule by the people" (an essentialist definition) but is valued as the only known institutional mechanism for error-correction and leadership change without bloodshed.
This is no longer working for me.
I am currently unable to zoom out to the full width when accessing Veritula on mobile.
Since users are able to revise other users’ ideas, why is it standard practice on Veritula to submit trivial improvements to ideas (such as correction of typos, poor grammar and redundancies) as criticisms, rather than directly revising the idea itself? Example: #2865
Perhaps I have misunderstood the intention of enabling users to revise other people’s ideas.
Given #2877, will this still be the case?
Note: Discussions with outstanding top-level criticisms do not render a 'criticised' pill like ideas with outstanding criticisms do.
Since discussions themselves are criticisable, is there anything wrong with just titling a discussion 'Karl Popper' and then putting the equivalent of an encyclopedia article in the about section? That is functionally identical to what an article would be, but I am interested if you would prefer discussions not be used that way.