Okay. You can't name any problem that would be solved by a reply.
a. no.
b. nope.
I said what the problem was.
The unsolved problem being the feeling.
Just cause you want to go staw vulcan on me in your map doesn't change my territory.
Your emotions are not a problem relevant to the person you're writing to unless that person knows you extremely well and has some specific reason to be concerned about your emotions, e.g. - your mother or your spouse.
I should do nothing that you say when you offer bad advice. If invalidating my emotions is your adv
Okay. You can't name any problem that would be solved by a reply. So there is no reason for the recipient of your message to reply. So the values underlying your emotions are irrational and you should look into changing them. See
If you currently feel like you lack respect and that's important to you, then you have an unsolved problem. You have an unsolved problem and don't know how to solve it. So you don't know what questions are relevant. If you did know what questions are relevant you would have answered them already and you would no longer have the problem. So you should be willing to answer a question even if it seems irrelevant to your problem.
Newtons theory of relativity has flaws but it's still a good idea and can be used in plenty of cases.
No it can't. It can only be used in situations where it happens to agree with reality. That's not the same as the theory being correct.
The amount of goodness approach has no objective way to determine the sizes of the amounts, so it leads to subjective bias instead of objective knowledge, and it creates unresolvable disagreements between people.
There's nothing bad about two people with different priors coming to different conclusions. It creates an
Why would we need more research to work out that the simulation hypothesis is a bad idea? Computational universality implies that if we were being simulated on a computer, it would be impossible for us to know about the underlying hardware. Any hardware that implements a universal set of computational gates can support universal computation. There are lots of different kinds of universal gates, so you can't tell what gates are being used by looking at the results of a computation. So the simulation hypothesis does no work in explaining what we observe. The... (read more)
Your emotions are not a problem relevant to the person you're writing to unless that person knows you extremely well and has some specific reason to be concerned about your emotions, e.g. - your mother or your spouse.
... (read more)