Comment by mistermann
3 months ago
"...there’s no reasoning involved...wait, could I just be succumbing to my heuristic intuitions of what is (seems to be) true....let's reconsider using System 2 thinking..."
3 months ago
"...there’s no reasoning involved...wait, could I just be succumbing to my heuristic intuitions of what is (seems to be) true....let's reconsider using System 2 thinking..."
Or there is no objective reality (well there isn’t, check out the study), and reality is just a rendering of the few state variables that keep track of your simple life.
A little context about you:
- person
- has hands, reads HN
These few state variables are enough to generate a believable enough frame in your rendering.
If the rendering doesn’t look believable to you, you modify state variables to make the render more believable, eg:
Context:
- person
- with hands
- incredulous demeanor
- reading HN
Now I can render you more accurately based on your “reasoning”, but truly I never needed all that data to see you.
Reasoning as we know it could just be a mechanism to fill in gaps in obviously sparse data (we absolutely do not have all the data to render reality accurately, you are seeing an illusion). Go reason about it all you want.
Is this a clever rhetorical trick to make it appear that your prior claim was correct?
If not: what am I intended to take away from this? What is its relevance to my comment?
You made a joke about questioning reality, I simply entertained it. You can do whatever you want with it, wasn’t a slight at all.
3 replies →