|
Fate Of Twist
@
FateOfTwist_
Shitlordaeron
|
|
IDK, THIS
|
|
|
3.955
Tweetovi
|
255
Pratim
|
731
Osobe koje vas prate
|
| Tweetovi |
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
24. sij |
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
14. sij |
|
oh, it's a thread, and I give a method for manifesting that instability
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
14. sij |
|
being on this account feels so cursed since i switched to another alt...
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
14. sij |
|
Which is "the last clause"? Can you link it?
Second recommendation is good, and I think I realised I should be doing something like that somewhere in there.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
8. sij |
|
tobogganing in the mountains, then snow shoeing in the mountains, then cross country skiing in the mountains
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
8. sij |
|
for like 99.9% of the population, it is immoral to have opinions on this
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
24. stu |
|
sometimes shit happens
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
20. stu |
|
/3 but what does this have to do with /scientific/ realism? What does this even mean to you?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
20. stu |
|
2/ If you're analysing something like the nature of reality, something we have an intimate understanding of in the ordinary everyday, your analysis should stay close to the phenomenology of this understanding, rather than running off to something completely unrelated and contrary
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
20. stu |
|
1/ Well, there is no one simple method. But some heuristics, which EY fails is that it should have explanatory power, it should be rigorous, it should be consistent.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
This is also a clever ploy to get you to read this :^)
(^:
:^)
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Gosh my writing is so stodgy and lectury, maybe talking down, a hint of almost sanctimony?
I'd like to change it. Your reflections on how this comes off to you, tone, would be nice. Either replied here or DMs (preferably not in reply to other threads)
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Here's a general positive take on ontology
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
If your conception of an absolute world was based on scientific theory in some sense, then I would recommend reading this
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
I'm not sure who exactly to point to for literature on this conception of science. Neopragmatists and scientific practice people are all good. (later) Putnam and van Fraassen are good. Hasok Chang is good but needs more than a pinch of salt
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
The person to read for this is Heidegger, and that's where I got much of this from
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
> Science can easily block you from [having a more complete ontology], if your conception of ontology is purely scientific.
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
Science can easily block you from doing this, if your conception of ontology is purely scientific.
> Science can talk about almost anything, but it can only talk about them in a very narrow set of ways
mobile.twitter.com/FateOfTwist_/s…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
The sense of ontology which tries to be as broad and all encompassing as possible should seek to capture all of that, and more.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fate Of Twist
@FateOfTwist_
|
19. stu |
|
These are not all just factual but also practical. They are not contradictory but complementary, but also in a sense partially exclusive in that the apple can't be all of that at once simultaneously for you.
|
||
|
|
||