kbrkbr

16 ms·

241.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
Even the enforcement of rules and the expectation on that are location dependent. Someone I know walked on a crosswalk in a southern european country, expecting that this will be honored like it is here. Ended up in hospital for two weeks.
242.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I’m honestly shocked every time I read something like this. My first reaction is: where did this go so wrong? “Scepticism is violence”? Scepticism once was science! And everything I learned points to that it should be so. But then I think t
243.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
This study makes a causal claim (“… suggests that this association was mediated…”). The article you refer to speaks of correlation, but the last paragraph is also reading the correlation as causation. I have a hard time thinking of how to g
244.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
This had zero chance of succeeding. Germany is a federal state with strong separation of power between federal government and local governments with local police forces. Society is split like elsewhere, but the fringe parties like AFD are a
245.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
The moral police was introduced under Ahmadinedshad‘s rein, so not long ago. It is not a fundament of the current regime.
246.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
If you’re into probability, statistics and/or ML, Judea Pearl‘s The Book Of Why enlighted me kind of. While reading and applying, the suspicion had grown in me that probability is embedded in causality. Specifically when using Bayes th
247.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
Yes! I hate this so much. The only search engine that respects what I type in seems startpage these days. Other search engines give me results that are useless most of the time, because they do not contain all my carefully chosen search ter
248.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
Well, people do not always jump to simplistic conclusions and forget all the nuances involved. I think that makes this part of your reply an example of exactly what it’s criticizing.
249.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
> People always jump to simplistic conclusions and forget all the nuances involved. That looks like a classic Matthew 7:3 - Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
250.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
This. In the language popularized by Kahnemann et al. I tell myself: wow, he really got my system 1. And then system 2 needs to work on on undoing the belief created, get back to sober doubt and weigh the probabilities. But this is an inter
251.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
That looks like something to work with. Now the thesis becomes somewhat testable. I would argue that power should be constructed so it does not matter what the personality of the person in power is. Clear rules and checks and balances. And
252.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
Thanks for your clarification. I really enjoy your arguments. I reply that I find the idea of from first principles proving the existence of something, e.g. an apple a weird notion. What is the justification of asking for it? That is a rati
253.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I think we are talking past each other. > Truth in pure mathematics doesn’t really have any meaning, because you simply invent the rules Yes, I was saying that you can view mathematics like that. Not everyone does though, so I question t
254.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
That was not my main point, but primitives are not axioms. They are objects talked about in axioms. I give you they are close. My point was that 1. numbers are simpler primitives than wisdom 2. You can treat mathematics purely syntactically
255.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I give you the Münchhausen or Agrippa“s trilemma. But in math we start with natural numbers or sets. Starting with „wise“ and „loving“ as primitives is a different thing. You can even treat mathematics as syntax, that only gets meaning whe
256.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
„One of the most fundamental lessons I learned from my training at the Monastic Academy was that wise and loving people should have power. Power is morally neutral—used by people who lack wisdom and love, it causes tremendous harm. Used by
257.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I actually meant „Have you realized how the scales do NOT match up between the plots?“, but somehow I can’t edit the comment.
258.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
What is the point of hand wavy overlaying two time series, as if the interpretation was obvious (cumulative excess deaths vs. Covid deaths). Have you realized how the scales do match up between the plots? Same for excess deaths against vac
259.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I understood the thread roughly this way: „philosophy makes progress. The evidence is that the modern world has adopted the more progressed rules of enlightement and scientific rules.“ And my reply was that this is highly questionable. I’m
260.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
Good point, I agree that it did not. Were those ideas however progress, or a tool that the Committee of Public Safety used because it fit their agenda? Was this philosophy finding truth that guided policy, or was it making up rhetorical arg
261.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
The measure of success is different from school to school, if any exists at all in a given school. And there is no lack of schools.
262.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
The causality here is hard to prove, even untangle. I think the French Revolution was largely more influential for the state of governments today. I also think that science was not influenced so much by Popper, but much more by Fisher and N
263.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I was making a formal point, not arguing about facts…
264.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
A: you spent it B: it’s a currency Here is how the thread went (too lazy for quantifiers and variables). 1. not A => not B 2. So Peso not A => Peso not B 3. You: But Peso A => Peso B This is a non sequitur. „Not A => Not B“ does
265.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
> If you don't spend it, it's not a currency > You didn't, others did though, therefore it's a currency From the first statement you can only conclude that if it’s a currency, then you spend it (by modus tollens).
266.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
That would be enough if the two named other explanations and bumblebees having rudimentary feelings would make up all of the explanation space. I have doubts about that.
267.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I agree with you. You already named some explanations with the same likelihood of the data, but a far higher prior probability. Bumblebees having feelings is a good way down the explanatory chain, and would warrant a lot more additional pie
268.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
That are interesting possibilities. I just wish some Jean Perrin would design and perform a great experiment to exclude some possibilities from the explanation space.
269.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
I fail to see the helpfulness of describing or defining something we do not understand in terms of something related we equally do not understand, „understand“ here in the sense of „have a clear theory that gives meaning to the words we use
270.
by kbrkbr 4y ago
This. However if I do not hit space in between words every time, an autocorrect function replaces at random times the word I’m typing/sliding now plus the word I typed before by some utter nonsense combination. I hate this so much, but

More ›