flannel jesus

I don't see why you're bringing insults into it, I'm not calling you stupid. From a Bayesian perspective, evidence for a belief Q is information that ...

it's clear on the home page on desktop. Not so easy to find on mobile

well I for one am plenty convinced. Affect the chemistry of the brain and you affect mental processes too. Plus, the closest thing we've built to a th...

In chapter 11 of the Annaka Harris audiobook Lights On, she has a conversation with Carlo Rovelli. Most of the conversation is about Rovelli's view th...

The way you had worded it prior didn't seem to acknowledge the "other factors". It sounded like you just thought, you have particles with these lower ...

is it meant as a challenge to physicalism? Something along the lines of, "well if physicalism is true, then at what point does matter go from just mat...

well then I can't rephrase your question for you. I'm not sure what you're getting at, if not my attempt at rephrasing. I do recommend avoiding the sp...

Well you skip the question about spontaneous generation of sentience, and just ask, why is it that this hunk of smushy pink wet matter has an experien...

I think it's certainly worth talking about the hard problem! I bought an audio book that's all about the question "what is it like to be something?" W...

Maybe I got distracted by the word "spontaneous", which is a word magical thinkers tend to use to dismiss out of hand the idea that, say, evolution ca...

I'm not sure it's established that there's anything "spontaneous" about it. And once you realize that, the rest of your question is just... chemistry....

I don't think that's the right question.

This is exactly why earlier in the thread, I disagreed with the idea that it's simply the properties of particles that explain the properties of highe...

Doesn't justification require some degree of understanding

"explained by properties" isn't it I don't think. The properties, on their own, explain next to nothing. Instead, I think a lot of high level things a...

I think this is really at the center of a lot of disagreement in these types of conversations. Things often are very much unlike the things that make ...

Funnily enough I had the same question myself the other day. "If physics has many quantum fields, does that mean it's not technically monism?" I guess...

interesting, thanks for elucidating

the way he phrased it made it sound like he doesn't call himself a physicalist for other reasons, but that he does still believe in a physical type of...

interesting distinction, to call yourself a monist but not a physicalist. I guess that means you believe in strong emergence?

she'll make it pretty explicit before you get far in. I hope you enjoy it

Yes, describing things from the outside seems so far removed from what it feels like to be inside. Experience does seem drastically different, hence t...

I don't take that kind of feedback from someone who doesn't understand the difference between a normal implication and a bidirectional one. Maybe sugg...

That's not what "coherent" means at all. That's just a bidirectional implication.

the thing I said wasn't an explanation didn't have any because.

That's not an explanation, that's just a sentence describing the phenomenon you want to explain.

ease of access to referenced information is actually pretty important I think. There's a reason academic journals require cited sources.

too right. I've seen this pattern too, people just posting videos (sometimes hours long videos) without explaining anything about why they're posting ...

Yeah humanity will likely never know for sure. I'm partial to the Mathematical Universe / Ruliad class of ideas, which are both just different ways of...

The boundaries are a little fuzzy. Facebook is the poster child of social media. Then Instagram. Twitter, but that seems a bit less strong. Reddit eve...

What counts as social media?

i said "if it's ontologically true". I didn't say "it's ontologically true". This is a conditional statement.

i don't know what a "fundamental and general ontology" is. What I do know is that, when you have a turing-complete system, other emergent systems can ...

mhm. notice how specific it is. i didn't say "does not explain", i said "does not explain this specific set of abstract principles." See where you wen...

ok, you inferred incorrectly. you overgeneralized. That generalization isn't the case, it's not applicable.

Too general. I said something specific. I didn't say "does not explain".

The trick there is what they mean by "reduce". I think there's perhaps, and this is arguable, but a difference between abstract explanatory reduction,...

I personally don't care if that particular movement was conscious or not. I've come to view conscious decisions as something separated in time from wh...

I think this is a mistake. The idea that consciousness is not causal. It seems to me that it would be a very strange for the world to be full of peopl...

Not just about your own beliefs, about anybody else's too. If someone else believes something, and they call that belief 'knowledge', you're going to ...

I want to follow this thread but I don't care to have a debate about it - I don't think it would be productive. I think P2 probably needs more detail,...

that's exactly right! If you have two beliefs, both with equal and very strong epistemic justification, but one of which turns out to be true, one of ...

I don't know what you're getting at here. If someone knows something is false, they don't believe it, and if they don't believe it they don't know it.

it's funny that we both took that quote to be supporting our respective sides. My side is saying, "belief" already means "I think it's true", and just...

the T is implicit in the J. Idk what you mean by jettisoning truth, we're just getting rid of it as a criteria for what we call knowledge. We know a b...

when you say "no possible further indicator", you're saying "nothing further than the justification we currently have", so it's still the J doing all ...

nope

no direct evidence, but I don't think there's direct counter evidence either so I think about what seems more likely

I do think it's pretty likely that violence in general, and sexual violence against women in particular, was more common the further back from "societ...

if you think a thought, the fact that you're thinking that thought is straight up factual, but only in that moment. If you think in a later moment, "I...