I'm think the problem doesn't make sense in the GS paradigm. Kuhn wrote that problem set in one paradigm aren't necessarily expressable in the paradigm of another framework and I think this is case like that.

Do you realise that over the course of the discussion, you have

1) offered a solution to the problem of ubnfounded foundations.

2) offered a claim that a solution exists, but is too long to write down.

3) offered a claim that the problem doesn't exist in the first place.

1) offered a solution to the problem of ubnfounded foundations.

The solution offered at the beginning is basically: "Don't try to let your reasoning be based on underlying foundations in the first place."

That leaves the open question about how to reason. GS is an answer to that question.

"One the one hand, on the other hand, on the third hand"-reasoning as advocated in Superforcasting where there doesn't have to be a shared foudnation for all three hands is another. That's what Tetlock calls "foxy" thinking and where he argue... (read more)

Open thread, Jul. 25 - Jul. 31, 2016

by MrMind 1 min read25th Jul 2016133 comments


If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post, then it goes here.

Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)

3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.

4. Unflag the two options "Notify me of new top level comments on this article" and "