3 ms·

In that case I disagree strongly with your premise, but that's fine. I don't argue past epistemological closures but (sincerely) thanks for the discussion!

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
> I don't argue past epistemological closures... Let's talk about that instead, if you don't mind. I think that might be a really useful thing to have in my mental toolbox, if I understood it. What is "epistemological closure"? How do you know when a conversation has hit it? Why do you stop there?
- weeksie 4y ago
  Sure! Informally, it's when there is a disagreement about methods of finding truth. In practice that's when the two positions in a discussion are using a different framework for deciding what's true in the world. Are illnesses caused by bad humors or are they caused by an imbalance of cold and hot foods? That discussion will eventually reach a point where both participants realize they're arguing about theology, but it'll take a little while to get there. Once there, it's not like there's nothing left to do but unless both sides are willing to go "hey we disagree about truth here do you want to talk about the reasons why instead of the object level stuff about what's true" it's better for all involved to just smile and call it a day. Avoids a lot of less filling/tastes great shouting matches
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    That explains some of the most annoying threads that I have seen on HN. Both sides are at that point, but neither side will stop. So they just keep going, blowing their talking points past the other side that isn't listening, not just because they don't want to (though they probably don't), but because they can't - each position makes no sense within the other framework. And by the way, I deeply appreciate your style of argument and disagreement. You disagreed without being disagreeable, and without even really arguing. You listened, made sure you understood, stated that you disagreed, and moved on cheerfully. May your style spread.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

> I don't argue past epistemological closures... Let's talk about that instead, if you don't mind. I think that might be a really useful thing to have in my mental toolbox, if I understood it. What is "epistemological closure"? How do you know when a conversation has hit it? Why do you stop there?

weeksie 4y ago
Sure! Informally, it's when there is a disagreement about methods of finding truth. In practice that's when the two positions in a discussion are using a different framework for deciding what's true in the world. Are illnesses caused by bad humors or are they caused by an imbalance of cold and hot foods? That discussion will eventually reach a point where both participants realize they're arguing about theology, but it'll take a little while to get there. Once there, it's not like there's nothing left to do but unless both sides are willing to go "hey we disagree about truth here do you want to talk about the reasons why instead of the object level stuff about what's true" it's better for all involved to just smile and call it a day. Avoids a lot of less filling/tastes great shouting matches
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  That explains some of the most annoying threads that I have seen on HN. Both sides are at that point, but neither side will stop. So they just keep going, blowing their talking points past the other side that isn't listening, not just because they don't want to (though they probably don't), but because they can't - each position makes no sense within the other framework. And by the way, I deeply appreciate your style of argument and disagreement. You disagreed without being disagreeable, and without even really arguing. You listened, made sure you understood, stated that you disagreed, and moved on cheerfully. May your style spread.