A graduate student of philosophy. Research interests are philosophy of mind, cognitive science, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of science, evolutionary biology, biocultural evolution, and economics. Also a combat sports and comedy fan.
Oh, it's not pretty much front page worthy the way I wrote it. There's no question about that. It's pretty conversational (rambly as you guys say) and is using persuasion at the end. I think that's a big no-no to be on the front page.
Also, I'm new here. And I'm glad to have to have found this online. I actually thought that one has to "submit" to the mods something to be considered to be in the front page. I was looking for that button when I wrote my first article which I think was front-page material. I really wanted it to be considered for the front page. It got there. I don't know how.
If you have read the first one, it's quite different as to how it's written.
This second one was a more personal blog post. This was something that I just wanted to have on my personal blog like a series. It's not addressed to the usual member of the community. I had a gut feel that it won't speak to the usual member of the community. This confirms it.
I'm glad that the LW community is quick to chastise things like that and, so far, I like it here. I'll be more clearer in my next posts here and do away with that conversational style and stick to "technical" topics: like things in my academic research.
Thank you Raemon for the comment and for asking for reasons and feedback. I appreciate it.
Thank you, Said Achmiz for engaging. I now have a better grasp of the content that one should post here and the type of writing.
Feel free to point me to a better direction in the future. I appreciate it.
Rock and roll!
I'm glad you find it interesting! I think it's a helpful concept in closing the gap between "subjectivist" and the "objectivist" chasm. What's also interesting is that if thought about more, two views on information emerges. One, it's everywhere like everything is information! We can only perceive what our biology affords us to detect (and in what quality). Second, it's all inside us. There is no information out there in the real world! It's all generated by us (even the value). This is quite counter-intuitive. And pretty scary when used in education. It's just all in your heads! But, for now, I think holds more water. It just needs to be treated more a more sophisticated manner than many social constructivists do.