Search Ideas

Reverted as of f8ed700.

cc @edwin-de-wit re ‘strong’ vs ‘weak’ criticism

The idea is considered false until all criticism is resolved. Since the goal is to live a rational life, we wouldn't act in accordance with that idea.

To someone unfamiliar with Veritula, this may sound like you’re suggesting not to live according to an idea even after all its criticisms have been resolved.

I recommend changing it to ‘we wouldn't act in accordance with an idea that has outstanding criticisms.’

We accept that idea as true until it receives criticism.

‘until it is criticized’ would be more idiomatic, I think.

Edwin says to either have hover effects for all clickable items or none of them. Buttons currently don’t have hover effects but links do.

I could remove hover effects from links. macOS links in System Settings don’t have a hover effect either. (They don’t even have a pointer cursor but IMO that’s going too far.)

Edwin says to be consistent. Either have hover effects for all clickable items or none of them.

I could remove hover effects from links. macOS links in System Settings don’t have a hover effect either. (They don’t even have a pointer cursor but IMO that’s going too far.)

I went back and forth on this. Native macOS buttons don’t have a hover effect and the human-interface guys at Apple are world class. I’m inclined to defer to their expertise. They know things I don’t.

@edwin-de-wit says buttons should have a hover effect.

Having implemented this, a problem has surfaced: when linking to an old version of an idea, the alert “You’re about to comment on an old version of this idea. Are you sure …” shows. That’s jarring if you didn’t want to comment but merely look at the idea.

It’s a valid criticism, but off-topic here. In both my book and video, I define these labels specifically as types of knowledge—not as trivial utterances or noise. So the label I’m looking for doesn’t need to directly address that concern, since I’ll make it clear upfront that all of them are knowledge types.

Thanks for the reminder! Yes, I agree it’s good to strive for some form of resolution. My current take is that I’m still satisfied with Intuitions and Drives as more accessible labels. But the shortcomings you’ve raised in Statement are severe, and I hope to find a better alternative. Unfortunately, I haven’t had much success on my own. I’ll share my current thoughts here — perhaps we can continue exploring alternatives for Statement if you think that’s worthwhile. If, however, you believe all three labels are a mistake and that it’s irrational for me to pursue them, I of course understand if you’d prefer not to continue the discussion.

Problems with Statement

1) By definition a statement is a verbalized expression, whereas explicit knowledge doesn’t need to be verbalized. It just needs to be verbalizable. Calling it a Statement is confusing, as people might think it must be verbalized, while my point is simply that it can be verbalized.

2) It also carries the figurative meaning of “making a statement” through non-verbal actions (e.g., wearing a certain outfit, defying a social norm), which causes confusion, as you pointed out in #1700.

3) You say that statements don’t necessarily need to contain knowledge (see #1806), but can also be trivial or tautological. While I agree, I don’t see this as a relevant criticism of my labels, since in my book and video I define them as types of knowledge — not as trivial utterances or noise. Therefore, the label I’m looking for doesn’t need to address this criticism, since I’ll clarify beforehand that all are types of knowledge.

Given these problems, I’ve tried to find a more suitable word. The only candidate I’ve found so far is Formulations. It conveys explicitness, but it doesn’t fully address problem 1), since it still carries the connotation of being expressed rather than merely expressible.

Curious to hear your thoughts, as always.

Thanks for the reminder! Yes, I agree it’s good to strive for some form of resolution. My current take is that I’m still satisfied with Intuitions and Drives as more accessible labels. But the shortcomings you’ve raised in Statement are severe, and I hope to find a better alternative. Unfortunately, I haven’t had much success on my own. I’ll share my current thoughts here — perhaps we can continue exploring alternatives for Statement if you think that’s worthwhile. If, however, you believe all three labels are a mistake and that it’s irrational for me to pursue them, I of course understand if you’d prefer not to continue the discussion.

Problems with Statement

1) By definition a statement is a verbalized expression, whereas explicit knowledge doesn’t need to be verbalized. It just needs to be verbalizable. Calling it a Statement is confusing, as people might think it must be verbalized, while my point is simply that it can be verbalized.

2) It also carries the figurative meaning of “making a statement” through non-verbal actions (e.g., wearing a certain outfit, defying a social norm), which causes confusion, as you pointed out in #1700.

3) You say that statements don’t necessarily need to contain knowledge (see #1806), but can also be trivial or tautological. While I agree, I don’t see this as a relevant criticism of my labels, since in my book and video I define them as types of knowledge — not as trivial utterances or noise.

Given these problems, I’ve tried to find a more suitable word. The only candidate I’ve found so far is Formulations. It conveys explicitness, but it doesn’t fully address problem 1), since it still carries the connotation of being expressed rather than merely expressible.

Curious to hear your thoughts, as always.

Interesting. Yes, you’re right that statement is also used figuratively—for example, in the phrase “making a statement”, where it means expressing something without words.

But the more literal definition is a clear expression in words:

Oxford English:

a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing.

Nevertheless, I think your criticism is valid: statement could indeed be misinterpreted in different ways, depending on the context.

I don’t take this personally, and I understand your intention isn’t to attack or belittle. To keep our exchange enjoyable and productive, I’ll make an effort to be more attentive to spelling, terminology, and precision. That said, I’m generally less concerned with exact spelling or perfect terminology, since my focus is usually on parsing the meaning or reasoning behind a theory or criticism. I try to be as charitable as possible in interpreting what someone is trying to say, focusing on the intended idea rather than the precise wording. Still, I recognize that clarity of wording may matter more to others—especially in discussions—so I’ll do my best to be more precise.

I think this is off-topic because my carelessness that caused my typos had no effect on my choice of new terminology. (Derived from your suggestion in #1808)

Great, looks like you learned something new. You’ve found a bit of truth :)

@dennis-hackethal Damn. I didn't know that. But if I understand it, 'few' means not many, and 'a few' means something like five or 6. I have a few close friends.

Damn. I didn't know that. But if I understand it, 'few' means not many, and 'a few' means something like five or 6. I have a few close friends.

Done as of b423e18.

As of acb14e3, the revision button is an icon button that lives next to the collapse icon button.

Therefore, the button doesn’t need to be hidden anymore.

Done as of acb14e3.

The idea is not good if it has outstanding criticisms.

Don’t worry about which ideas are better than others. That’s a remnant of justificationism. Only go by whether an idea has outstanding criticisms.

You’ve since made the change to “a few changes” (as of #1894) but I think that change was premature.

Don’t make changes you don’t understand. Take questions literally and answer them.

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/The-Difference-Between-Few-and-A-Few-

No.

I went over it first and made a few changes. After that, Grammarly recommended that I remove the 'a' before 'criticism' and to remove the 'they are'.