Search Ideas
1940 ideas match your query.:
…this part seems entrenched…
Well, both preferences are entrenched as a result of the conflict between them being entrenched.
We could just as well say that the other preference, the one for letting your nails grow normally, is entrenched.
I’m sensing a bias in favor of explicit preferences and against (what you think are) inexplicit/unconscious preferences.
If you carried a nail clipper or nail file with you at all times, would you use them instead of your teeth?
I haven’t used Obsidian, so I don’t understand what you are requesting. Is it that, whenever you open a bracket, you want the closing bracket to appear automatically?
It’s interesting how connected these virtues are. Rationality, honesty, integrity, justice, all relate to each other or even fall out of each other. For example, you can’t be honest and irrational, you can’t be a rational liar (with some exceptions), you can’t be dishonest and conscientious, etc.
Maybe the underlying, most fundamental principle is rationality. Or maybe it’s the law of identity, and all of these virtues are different expressions of it. Not sure yet.
… within their own lives.
Grammar. Do you mean ‘one’s own life’? Or simpler ‘one’s life’ (which you say later on, “one's life and circumstances.”)
Fallibilism is the view that there is no criterion to say with certainty what’s true and what’s false. As a result, we inevitably make mistakes; all of our knowledge is tentative.
Nothing is obvious but depends on what one understands about reality. No knowledge is beyond revision, even if it claims to be.
Knowledge grows by correcting errors in our knowledge. We correct errors by guessing solutions to problems and then criticizing and testing those proposed solutions.
We should always be careful not to destroy or even slow down the means of error correction.
This view is mainly influenced by Popper, and errors are my own.
There was no need for this revision. #3047 already polished everything. I’m restoring that version.
Before you revise an idea, be sure to check if it has already been revised.
When you do decide to revise an idea, be sure to check off addressed criticisms in the same revision.
#3048 slipped through the cracks somehow.
You don’t need to do anything else for this idea for now.
This is done as of 9b5788c but it’s still free for now. Will make it a paid feature after some more testing and polishing.
What do you think of: it’s the law of the excluded middle that constrains the universe to exist. Nothing can’t exist, so the only alternative that’s left is for something to exist.
Integrity: The refusal to permit a breach between one's best ideas and one's actions.
Phrasing it in terms of ‘best’ ideas could be tricky. Recall that we don’t (currently) know how to classify ideas as better/best/worse/worst.
I suggest speaking of one’s convictions instead.
Rationality: The commitment to the ongoing deliberate use of conjecture and criticism.
This is vague and compatible with irrational uses of conjecture and criticism. People can use them to come up with evasions and lies.
Would it make sense to refer to #2281 instead?
Moral Ambitiousness
The only quote I could (quickly) find is lowercase: https://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pride.html#order_2:~:text=by%20the%20term%3A%20%22-,moral%20ambitiousness,-.%22%20It%20means%20that
I recommend getting in the habit of copy/pasting from original sources, and linking 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.
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.
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.
Have you seen: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/core-objectivist-values
Might have some more virtues to include.
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.