Search Ideas
2199 ideas match your query.:
It occurs to me that self-discipline can literally be interpreted to mean disciplining the self in the way a parent might discipline a child. That framing makes it easier to see problems with self-discipline.
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.
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).
Good question. It is not something I have thought about much myself, but I wanted to allow for the possibility that people may want to discuss keeping their digital devices tidy, not just physical spaces.
I suppose digital tidiness would consist of organising your computer, phone, or tablet in such a way that it is straightforward to find things when you need them.
The activity feed already shows updates to discussions. Could just include changes to the privacy setting there. And, whenever the privacy setting does change, notify participants of the change.
On second thought, the reason for the privacy change may well be related to the reason for any changes to the title or about section, so doing it in the same notification might actually be clearer for users.
A change to the privacy setting is notable enough that it requires a dedicated notification independent of any changes to a discussion title or about section.
Good call. I made the pagination ‘sticky’ as of 1e7a85d. Archiving this but let me know if something isn’t working right.
After our conversation today, I agree that chores don’t qualify.
Maybe a solution to the self-coercion for things like paying taxes is to internalise the fact that paying taxes keeps you out of prison, and that therefore it is good for you to pay your taxes. Putting paying taxes in it’s proper context for your subconscious.
Yeah I’d consider discipline irrational because it means one part of you coerces another.
Having said that, there could be value in learning how to deal productively with situations where you cannot avoid coercion. Like the government forcing you to do your taxes, which you will only do if you translate that external coercion into internal coercion. Nobody else can really coerce you, only you can coerce yourself. It would be nice to do this productively and also in a way that doesn’t practice/internalize self-coercion. And it should be rare. I don’t think basic chores qualify.
https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/unconflicted
Found this. Will read it when I have a moment to sit down.
In later implementations, I could maybe implement a ‘soft’ delete or grace period. Or I could keep the associated records and rely on authorization rules to prevent access. But as of right now, that’s a premature consideration.
Those could be deleted when the user is removed.
I am stuck on the subject of self-discipline.
It seems important to be able to get things done, even when we aren’t in the mood for it (basic chores, for example).
But this conflicts with CR ideas to do with self-coercion.
Have you seen: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/core-objectivist-values
Might have some more virtues to include.
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. The theory 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 changing policy and leadership without violence.
Fallibilism
This is the philosophical position that all human knowledge—every belief, theory, and observation—is conjectural, tentative, potentially incomplete, and potentially mistaken. It holds that there cannot be any conclusive justification or rational certainty for anything we might believe to be true (including observations).
Fallibilism is distinct from skepticism. Skepticism argues that because certainty is impossible, knowledge is impossible. Fallibilism agrees that certainty is impossible but denies that this invalidates knowledge. Fallibilism holds that people can and do possess real, objective knowledge, and that people can improve it through a process of error correction.
This functionality is pretty standard across apps. You can be removed from Discord servers, Telegram channels, etc without warning or reason at any time. People generally know and accept this. If they still put in effort, that’s on them.
That depends on a bunch of factors, including their relationship with the discussion owner, into which Veritula has no visibility.
That risk could be clearly communicated in the UI.
Maybe you remove them because you don’t even want them to be able to see anything.
There’d probably be a bunch of edge cases with this approach. For example, others would still be able to comment on those ideas, and the comments would have to be hidden from OPs. Which begs the question of how that impacts the displayed criticism count… And so on.
If you later realize that adding someone was a mistake, you should be able to correct that mistake.