3 ms·

> I don't think I can reasonably think about it any more, or make good judgements on the validity of the arguments I was about to say the same thing about diet

> I don't think I can reasonably think about it any more, or make good judgements on the validity of the arguments I was about to say the same thing about diets, before I even got to when you said: > It feels a little bit like reading about diets! It makes me wonder why something like that doesn't have a definitive answer, or something to point out which side (or both) is wrong, but they seem to be immune to inspection. Although, I did read a book called Diet Cults (written by just a journalist though) which contradicted all the extreme ones and suggested a very moderate approach.

ncallaway 5y ago
I would expect they don’t have very clear cut answers because both involve interactions with extremely complex systems that no one person is capable of fully understanding. I don’t know the explanations for why we hear such conflicting confident answers, but this is my suspicion: I imagine in both cases the majority of experts in the field would provide somewhat nuanced advice, couched in cautions about how much about these systems they don’t know or fully understand. None of those experts break through. What does break through is all you end up hearing from, which is a smaller minority on each side willing to make bold and confident predictions.
jmcqk6 5y ago
Perhaps the problem is that these things do not have definitive answers. Reality is extremely complex, with many interfacing chaotic systems. Why would we expect a single answer to work in every instance? What if there isn't a perfect diet for everyone, but each person can find the one that works best for them? I don't think it's surprising that there isn't a definitive answer to what the effects of a carrington event might be. The analysis required to provide such an answer would have such vast complexity that it's likely not worth the effort. All we have is our best guesses, based on informed and deliberate inquiry. I don't think we can reasonably expect anything more than that.

ncallaway 5y ago

I would expect they don’t have very clear cut answers because both involve interactions with extremely complex systems that no one person is capable of fully understanding. I don’t know the explanations for why we hear such conflicting confident answers, but this is my suspicion: I imagine in both cases the majority of experts in the field would provide somewhat nuanced advice, couched in cautions about how much about these systems they don’t know or fully understand. None of those experts break through. What does break through is all you end up hearing from, which is a smaller minority on each side willing to make bold and confident predictions.

jmcqk6 5y ago

Perhaps the problem is that these things do not have definitive answers. Reality is extremely complex, with many interfacing chaotic systems. Why would we expect a single answer to work in every instance? What if there isn't a perfect diet for everyone, but each person can find the one that works best for them? I don't think it's surprising that there isn't a definitive answer to what the effects of a carrington event might be. The analysis required to provide such an answer would have such vast complexity that it's likely not worth the effort. All we have is our best guesses, based on informed and deliberate inquiry. I don't think we can reasonably expect anything more than that.