5 ms·

I don't understand why you think it takes credentials to pontificate about this on an internet forum. Intellectual curiosity doesn't end at the boundaries of o

I don't understand why you think it takes credentials to pontificate about this on an internet forum. Intellectual curiosity doesn't end at the boundaries of our credentials. GP comment is relevant and thought provoking. Isn't that enough?

throwlaplace 6y ago
>pontificate about this on an internet forum it's not about "on an internet forum" it's in general - why don't we all reserve judgement more? we all know the answer of course: because we're arrogant and believe that our abilities to write software translate into abilities to do xyz. >Intellectual curiosity intellectual curiosity is much much more than reading a couple of online articles and making declarations
- sojournerc 6y ago
  > GP comment is relevant and thought provoking. Isn't that enough?
  - throwlaplace 6y ago
    there's nothing in the least bit thought provoking about it because it have any substance only claims (vague allusion to "memes" and undefined "Predictive Processing"). i wonder why that is? might it be because GP admits they aren't actually expert enough to substantiate any of the claims? and that's my point. i see claims all the time from people not entitled to make claims. i see substance very rarely. why? because claims are easy.
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      Every human being is entitled to make claims. Some claims have more merit and some have less. You can choose to engage or not based on the merit of their argument.
      - throwlaplace 6y ago
        >Every human being is entitled to make claims God this is so tired. No one is questioning anyone's right to free speech. What I'm questioning is the value of that speech and the humility involved in making claims. That's it.
        jotm 6y ago
        That leads nowhere. Everyone's sharing their opinions, the only solutions are to limit their freedoms or stop reading what they write.
        s1artibartfast 6y ago
        I guess I’m not clear what you are looking to achieve. Were you hoping the op would stop providing amateur opinions online?
        afarrell 6y ago
        > humility This is an important value. Please re-read my phrasing: - "I'd naively think" - "I don't see" - "I am skeptical" I am using words of uncertainty and lack-of-knowledge. The only claim I make with a certainty is "I have found <link> useful for addressing <personal experience>".
- bawolff 6y ago
  I'm not sure what you're doing on this site if not to listen to randoms talk. Even on other topics, its not like the various language fanboys that want to rewrite every program in $language are actual experts. I would also add rejecting a comment that doesnt depend on credentials out of hands due to lack of credentials is a form of the genetic fallacy
djaque 6y ago
Experience is different than authority and I don't think the parent comment was complaining that the first reply didn't have the authority to say what they did. I assume they were saying that you shouldn't place a lot of importance on someone with all of three seconds of experience in this problem. Especially when compared to researchers who have been thinking about it for decades. There are probably good reasons why they think boiling the problem down to so few dimensions is useful that I don't fully understand because I have literally no experience in psychology.
- afarrell 6y ago
  > There are probably good reasons why they think Exactly! I'd like to know what they are in more detail than the article was able to articulate.

throwlaplace 6y ago

>pontificate about this on an internet forum it's not about "on an internet forum" it's in general - why don't we all reserve judgement more? we all know the answer of course: because we're arrogant and believe that our abilities to write software translate into abilities to do xyz. >Intellectual curiosity intellectual curiosity is much much more than reading a couple of online articles and making declarations

sojournerc 6y ago
> GP comment is relevant and thought provoking. Isn't that enough?
- throwlaplace 6y ago
  there's nothing in the least bit thought provoking about it because it have any substance only claims (vague allusion to "memes" and undefined "Predictive Processing"). i wonder why that is? might it be because GP admits they aren't actually expert enough to substantiate any of the claims? and that's my point. i see claims all the time from people not entitled to make claims. i see substance very rarely. why? because claims are easy.
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    Every human being is entitled to make claims. Some claims have more merit and some have less. You can choose to engage or not based on the merit of their argument.
    - throwlaplace 6y ago
      >Every human being is entitled to make claims God this is so tired. No one is questioning anyone's right to free speech. What I'm questioning is the value of that speech and the humility involved in making claims. That's it.
      - jotm 6y ago
        That leads nowhere. Everyone's sharing their opinions, the only solutions are to limit their freedoms or stop reading what they write.
      - s1artibartfast 6y ago
        I guess I’m not clear what you are looking to achieve. Were you hoping the op would stop providing amateur opinions online?
      - afarrell 6y ago
        > humility This is an important value. Please re-read my phrasing: - "I'd naively think" - "I don't see" - "I am skeptical" I am using words of uncertainty and lack-of-knowledge. The only claim I make with a certainty is "I have found <link> useful for addressing <personal experience>".
bawolff 6y ago
I'm not sure what you're doing on this site if not to listen to randoms talk. Even on other topics, its not like the various language fanboys that want to rewrite every program in $language are actual experts. I would also add rejecting a comment that doesnt depend on credentials out of hands due to lack of credentials is a form of the genetic fallacy

djaque 6y ago

Experience is different than authority and I don't think the parent comment was complaining that the first reply didn't have the authority to say what they did. I assume they were saying that you shouldn't place a lot of importance on someone with all of three seconds of experience in this problem. Especially when compared to researchers who have been thinking about it for decades. There are probably good reasons why they think boiling the problem down to so few dimensions is useful that I don't fully understand because I have literally no experience in psychology.

afarrell 6y ago
> There are probably good reasons why they think Exactly! I'd like to know what they are in more detail than the article was able to articulate.