Yeah, I remember doing that, back before I found out about…uh, what exactly is it that we competent people do instead? I’m asking for a friend.
I usually just scroll until I get bored/my dash starts having trouble loading, then go back to the top. If there are any blogs where I really want to see every post (such as yours) I’ll check it every day.
I still haven’t grown out of this because
what if I miss something
I’ve been thinking about truth lately. Two things:
- Telling the truth is kind of a privilege. Not everyone is in the position where telling the truth is safe. Even if you are super-pro-honesty, that doesn’t go away.
- There’s this thing in HPMOR where Harry seems to have no idea with deceiving people without lying, but has (moral?) problems with actually not telling the truth. I’m not sure if I see the difference, from a moral/ethical perspective. People are asking you for (accurate) information and you don’t give it to them. Whether this is through deception or trough lying, doesn’t influence the fact that the person you were talking to has sub-accurate information.
Anonymous said: Probably offtopic, but could you explain what exactly the word "sentience" means? Wikipedia just defines it as "the ability to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively", but it's apparently used very differently - many people somehow don't take animals to be sentient when (many) animals pretty clearly have these abilities.
A lot of people don’t distinguish between sentience and sapience. Pretty much all animals are sentient (they’re able to perceive and react to stimuli, both internal and external), but only a limited number are sapient (sense of self, able to reason and draw conclusions beyond those reactions).
So when people say that animals aren’t sentient, what they actually mean is that animals aren’t sapient. And they tend to get really annoyed when you point that out to them :-)
I suspect that the theory behind using “sentience” like this is that animals lack qualia, which is a mystical noncausal property of Real People with Souls. They get annoyed when you say that animals have a subjective experience, because that’s part of a hard-reductionist worldview, and weakens the distinction between humans and other animals. (Compare elan vital.)
I do think there’s a difference between humans and most animals, or rather that there’s a difference between some animals (including humans, but also other primates, dolphins, elephants, maybe ravens, maybe octopuses…) and other animals.
Things that push species “further” on that continuum are tool use, language, sense of self, abstract thinking…
pandora is great because it tells you what traits music you like has
so I can be like “I like music with a subtle use of vocal harmony, electronica influences, extensive vamping, a clear emphasis on recording studio production. repetitive melodic phrasing, and pop-rock qualities”
and then I sound super-smart until someone asks me what those words mean
"Everyone wants to be Batman, but everyone should be Captain America."
— Captain America Doesn’t Need To Be A Jerk To Be Interesting (via juvjuvychan)
Who the hell wants to be Batman?
The very first thing we need to talk about is what I actually mean when I say “rational” or “rationality.” This is especially important because the way people use the word in everyday life is a bit different from the way aspiring rationalists use it. I believe that some conflicts between aspiring rationalists and people who don’t identify as such comes from this difference in meaning.
I won’t dwell too much on the everyday meaning of the word, since I’d like you to forget that when reading this blog. People often say “rational” when they want to indicate the opposite of “emotional”, which is a pet-peeve of a lot of rationalists. The few occasions I’ve seen the word used outside of a Less Wrong context, it’s often been used to judge people. Things like: “You need to stop being angry about being misgendered, that just isn’t rational." (Sure, that’s an extreme example, but it gets the point across.)
Suffice to say, aspiring rationalists such as me try to avoid using the word like that. But how do we use the word?
A lot of concepts used by aspiring rationalist of the Less Wrong variety stem from economics and cognitive psychology and “rational” isn’t much different. The way I’ll use the word on this blog differs slightly from how those disciplines use it, but there’s still significant overlap so if you end up reading a book written by an economist, you should have an idea what they’re talking about.
Rationality, in the sense that I’ll use it, consists of two related but different concepts: Epistemic Rationality and Instrumental Rationality. These can be summarized briefly as “knowing true things” and “reaching your goals.”
A longer explanation can be found below the cut:
My first post is life. I hope I didn’t screw anything up.
It might be a bit basic for some of you, but we’ll need it moving forward.
in stories featuring aliens, they’re always like “on my planet this never happens!” or “in my culture, this differs from your human culture.” and that’s neat and all because i like worldbuilding and all that jazz but wouldn’t it be fun if they just. couldn’t do that?
i want a story where humans encounter an alien who frustrates them because they don’t know enough to tell them anything concrete
like humans will ask “tell us about politics in your planet!” and the alien’s all “uh… hold on it’s been a while since i took gov. um….”
"what sorts of plants grow on your planet?"
"i dunno i grew up in the suburbs. they’re like… purple? idk what you want me to say"
"tell us about the culture on your planet!"
"do you have any idea how many fucking countries are back home, i don’t even know where to begin"
"your planet is obviously much more scientifically and technologically advanced than ours. is it possible for you to enlighten us on certain matters concerning space travel, or would that be a form of interference you must avoid?"
"naw it’s cool, it’s just that, um, i’m a philosophy major"
Animorphs. You want Animorphs.
(Source: darthpaulsartre, via flashofbishiesparkles)
Taningia danae is a big deep-sea squid with massive, manta-like fins, stubby arms, and a pair of fist-sized light organs on the end of two of its appendages.
Those are the largest light organs ever discovered, and we now know from observations of a live specimen that it actually uses them to blind deep-sea prey.
flashofbishiesparkles yxoque ozymandias271
I’m being tagged for this!