3 ms·

The man has wasted his precious time on earth trying to explain the meaning of life without accepting the existence of the soul. It makes total sense that he ca

by xvxvx 5mo ago

The man has wasted his precious time on earth trying to explain the meaning of life without accepting the existence of the soul. It makes total sense that he can be fooled by AI nonsense. To be 85 and lack basic wisdom is quite an astonishing achievement.

downbad_ 5mo ago
Wasted?
- jrm4 5mo ago
  I think so, personally. I wouldn't bank a lot on "the soul" per se, but Dawkins is absolutely one of those "smart but not wise" people. I imagine people don't dig it because it can be woo and vibey, but the older I get the more I understand the value of the "imprecise" metaphysical/religious/etc whatever you want to call it. Someone in this space who handles this very well, unlike Dawkins, is Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
  - luke5441 5mo ago
    Wise man Nassim Taleb who voted for Trump to help Palestinians and now Gaza and 10% increasing of the country he was born in is rubble. Maybe the lesson is that all those public intellectuals are not that wise and we should follow people more that stay in their lane.
    - amanaplanacanal 5mo ago
      Quite a few people appear to have voted against Harris because they thought Biden didn't do enough to help the Palestinians. I can't imagine how they thought Trump would be better, but somehow they did.
    - Klayy 5mo ago
      do you have a source for the claim that he voted for Trump?
      - novemp 5mo ago
        A few high-profile Muslims spoke out against Harris. This means every Muslim American voted for Trump. Obviously.
        luke5441 5mo ago
        He's a Lebanese Greek Orthodox Christian, not a Muslim.
        novemp 5mo ago
        It's an even stupider assumption, then!
        luke5441 5mo ago
        He had a few tweets about how Trump is better for peace in the middle east (https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1847252132665114887 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1847252132665114887 ). And then he posted about "voting against genocide" https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1849547336143245549/photo/1 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1849547336143245549/photo/1 . That's when I unfollowed him and that's where the assumption is coming from. ( Also note the "Trump comes out against regime change in Iran: We can’t get totally involved…We can’t even run ourselves" thing in the first post, lol)
      - luke5441 5mo ago
        He hinted at it on twitter. But looking now claims he voted for a third party candidate ( https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1910066542399967268 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1910066542399967268 ) . Doesn't make it much better because of the first-past the post voting system. Also he has a bit of influence and when he hints Trump is better on the Palestine issue, people might make this influence their decision ( https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1841515651820576902 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1841515651820576902 ).
    - jrm4 5mo ago
      Yeah, I'll grant you that one. I don't think he necessarily voted for Trump, and for me he did a good job of explaining Trump's appeal. But also, there is some sadly common brand of stupid that Taleb fell victim to when it came to thinking about Harris v. Trump on matters in the Middle East.
Slow_Hand 5mo ago
What is a soul, and how does one go about proving it’s existence? It doesn’t seem obvious to me.
- redbluered 5mo ago
  Neither existence nor nonexistence is obvious. Ergo, differences of opinion. Militants on both sides are problematic. I strongly dislike Dawkins, in the same way as I do people knocking on my door trying to convert me to any other religion. At least the zealots who knockon my door. I've had a few good conversations. Ditto for LLM sentience. We have no evidence either way.
- jrm4 5mo ago
  Op said "accepting," not proving. And the older I get, this does make sense to me. Belief in a soul doesn't really require proof for me. I understand that this may not be satisfying in an academic way for some, but "humans have souls and machines probably don't" strikes me as the wisest default position until we have some other very strong proof otherwise.
  - willmarch 5mo ago
    What evidence is there for humans having souls to support your "wisest default"? What would constitute "strong proof otherwise" in the case of machines? Wouldn't the wise position be that since there is no evidence of souls at all that the default should be that both humans and machines do not contain a soul until proven otherwise?
    - jrm4 5mo ago
      Not to me. The wise position starts from "Humans are mysterious, but I am one and I see that others are like me, so I think we have souls." along with "I get what a machine is from first principles and based on all I know, they don't feel." I get that this isn't as rigorous as one might like, but I think in the real world it's wise.
  - elch 5mo ago
dgoodell 5mo ago
Are you suggesting 85 year olds typically have more wisdom and are less easily fooled by things?

by xvxvx 5mo ago

downbad_ 5mo ago

Wasted?

jrm4 5mo ago
I think so, personally. I wouldn't bank a lot on "the soul" per se, but Dawkins is absolutely one of those "smart but not wise" people. I imagine people don't dig it because it can be woo and vibey, but the older I get the more I understand the value of the "imprecise" metaphysical/religious/etc whatever you want to call it. Someone in this space who handles this very well, unlike Dawkins, is Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
- luke5441 5mo ago
  Wise man Nassim Taleb who voted for Trump to help Palestinians and now Gaza and 10% increasing of the country he was born in is rubble. Maybe the lesson is that all those public intellectuals are not that wise and we should follow people more that stay in their lane.
  - amanaplanacanal 5mo ago
    Quite a few people appear to have voted against Harris because they thought Biden didn't do enough to help the Palestinians. I can't imagine how they thought Trump would be better, but somehow they did.
  - Klayy 5mo ago
    do you have a source for the claim that he voted for Trump?
    - novemp 5mo ago
      A few high-profile Muslims spoke out against Harris. This means every Muslim American voted for Trump. Obviously.
      - luke5441 5mo ago
        He's a Lebanese Greek Orthodox Christian, not a Muslim.
        novemp 5mo ago
        It's an even stupider assumption, then!
        luke5441 5mo ago
        He had a few tweets about how Trump is better for peace in the middle east (https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1847252132665114887 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1847252132665114887 ). And then he posted about "voting against genocide" https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1849547336143245549/photo/1 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1849547336143245549/photo/1 . That's when I unfollowed him and that's where the assumption is coming from. ( Also note the "Trump comes out against regime change in Iran: We can’t get totally involved…We can’t even run ourselves" thing in the first post, lol)
    - luke5441 5mo ago
      He hinted at it on twitter. But looking now claims he voted for a third party candidate ( https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1910066542399967268 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1910066542399967268 ) . Doesn't make it much better because of the first-past the post voting system. Also he has a bit of influence and when he hints Trump is better on the Palestine issue, people might make this influence their decision ( https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1841515651820576902 https://x.com/nntaleb/status/1841515651820576902 ).
  - jrm4 5mo ago
    Yeah, I'll grant you that one. I don't think he necessarily voted for Trump, and for me he did a good job of explaining Trump's appeal. But also, there is some sadly common brand of stupid that Taleb fell victim to when it came to thinking about Harris v. Trump on matters in the Middle East.

Slow_Hand 5mo ago

What is a soul, and how does one go about proving it’s existence? It doesn’t seem obvious to me.

redbluered 5mo ago
Neither existence nor nonexistence is obvious. Ergo, differences of opinion. Militants on both sides are problematic. I strongly dislike Dawkins, in the same way as I do people knocking on my door trying to convert me to any other religion. At least the zealots who knockon my door. I've had a few good conversations. Ditto for LLM sentience. We have no evidence either way.
jrm4 5mo ago
Op said "accepting," not proving. And the older I get, this does make sense to me. Belief in a soul doesn't really require proof for me. I understand that this may not be satisfying in an academic way for some, but "humans have souls and machines probably don't" strikes me as the wisest default position until we have some other very strong proof otherwise.
- willmarch 5mo ago
  What evidence is there for humans having souls to support your "wisest default"? What would constitute "strong proof otherwise" in the case of machines? Wouldn't the wise position be that since there is no evidence of souls at all that the default should be that both humans and machines do not contain a soul until proven otherwise?
  - jrm4 5mo ago
    Not to me. The wise position starts from "Humans are mysterious, but I am one and I see that others are like me, so I think we have souls." along with "I get what a machine is from first principles and based on all I know, they don't feel." I get that this isn't as rigorous as one might like, but I think in the real world it's wise.
- elch 5mo ago

dgoodell 5mo ago

Are you suggesting 85 year olds typically have more wisdom and are less easily fooled by things?