What I like about this essay and made it the winner is that it offers an alternative way of understanding the same ideas as I present in Fundamental Uncertainty from a different perspective. As an author, I’m frequently guilty of writing to explain things either to my past self or people who disagreed with me. Jimmy does me a real service by explaining the same core insights in way that will land with a different set of readers, and it’s what pushed his essay to the top.
TAG offers rationalist-style book review, meaning it’s half book report and half pointing out areas of disagreement and places where there was more to say and I didn’t say it. Nikon, meanwhile, offers more of an exploration of related ideas in epistemology, and I greatly liked the promise it represents that he’ll have more of interest to say in the future.
I enjoyed reading the other essays, too. A few words about each of them:
Avril Shakira Villar treated us to “Everything Adds Up to Normality”, which applies the themes of Fundamental Uncertainty to Philippine politics. I liked the insights this gave me into a part of the world I don’t know nearly enough about.
In “Questions for the reader (and writer) of “Fundamental Uncertainty””, Mitchell Porter identifies and engages with many of the unstated assumptions in my work, and I appreciate him doing this since I would have liked to address those more directly in the book but found them hard to work in while keeping the book short and focused.
Stanislav Krym took a critical eye to the book in “Fundamental Uncertainty: Alternate Framework and Pointwise Reduction”. I’m glad he did this, but alas he didn’t change my mind about anything. Still, I applaud the effort and want to encourage him and others to continue to take a critical eye on my writing.
Finally, in “The Paragraph Behind “I Don’t Know””, Gina Jon ties the book’s themes into a personal story that points to how we can embody fundamental uncertainty—something that I hope more people learn to do as a result of reading the book.
If you haven’t already, I encourage you to read the linked essays. I’ll be reaching out to the winners shortly to coordinate payment.
Thanks again to everyone who submitted an essay to the contest. Without further ado, the winner of the top prize of $1000 is:
The Uncertainty That Matters Isn’t Fundamental by Jimmy
What I like about this essay and made it the winner is that it offers an alternative way of understanding the same ideas as I present in Fundamental Uncertainty from a different perspective. As an author, I’m frequently guilty of writing to explain things either to my past self or people who disagreed with me. Jimmy does me a real service by explaining the same core insights in way that will land with a different set of readers, and it’s what pushed his essay to the top.
The winners of the two $500 prizes are:
Review of Fundamental Uncertainty by TAG
Further thoughts on fundamental uncertainty by Nikon Okdell
TAG offers rationalist-style book review, meaning it’s half book report and half pointing out areas of disagreement and places where there was more to say and I didn’t say it. Nikon, meanwhile, offers more of an exploration of related ideas in epistemology, and I greatly liked the promise it represents that he’ll have more of interest to say in the future.
I enjoyed reading the other essays, too. A few words about each of them:
Avril Shakira Villar treated us to “Everything Adds Up to Normality”, which applies the themes of Fundamental Uncertainty to Philippine politics. I liked the insights this gave me into a part of the world I don’t know nearly enough about.
In “Questions for the reader (and writer) of “Fundamental Uncertainty””, Mitchell Porter identifies and engages with many of the unstated assumptions in my work, and I appreciate him doing this since I would have liked to address those more directly in the book but found them hard to work in while keeping the book short and focused.
Stanislav Krym took a critical eye to the book in “Fundamental Uncertainty: Alternate Framework and Pointwise Reduction”. I’m glad he did this, but alas he didn’t change my mind about anything. Still, I applaud the effort and want to encourage him and others to continue to take a critical eye on my writing.
Finally, in “The Paragraph Behind “I Don’t Know””, Gina Jon ties the book’s themes into a personal story that points to how we can embody fundamental uncertainty—something that I hope more people learn to do as a result of reading the book.
If you haven’t already, I encourage you to read the linked essays. I’ll be reaching out to the winners shortly to coordinate payment.
Share