For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Conceptually speaking.
Good, then believe that. But you're simply not worth my time.Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 2:09 pmPerfect! I accept all of that. I accept that you have done your due-dilligence, and you have examined all the factors and that you haven't any major errors. So the only thing left in doubt is the incompleteness of your knowledge - the information that you do not have.Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 2:08 pm Hehe very well, I'll let you in on a little secret but you'll rerget this.
What you don't get is that I'm some sort of an acquired savant, when it comes to existential intelligence. Such an ability can't be measured in IQ but if I had to put a number on it, it's somewhere around 200. Also, I have decades of experience with unusual states of mind etc.
I'm far more existentially intelligent than all of you put together and I've put pretty much all relevant knowledge known by humanity into my subconscious, having it processed. I had to decrease my intelligence several times as it is, to be able to talk to you people about some basic things in basic ways, in a way and to a point which is comprehensible to you.
I'm just here for fun, talking about a few things, I'm not even serious. But every major idea you can find on this forum, I already considered, weighed at least a decade ago, using the scientific method and using probabilities, and then went far, far beyond that.
So much for your professional opinion.
Now tell me where your uncertainty lies. What evidence would convince you that you are wrong? What is your black swan?
The fact that you CAN'T DO THAT is precisely my proffesional opinion.
You aren't a scientist.
You have shifted the burden of DISPROOF onto us.
Yet he continues to engage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performat ... tradiction
I like the way you think...you make this one here have to think real hard...I like that.Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 2:16 pmYet he continues to engage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performat ... tradiction
I am putting the effort because I believe I can teach you to think for yourself. Something that you seem incapable of doing.
If you want to.
You can't teach me anything (and you want to win, not teach). I have you on ignore since months, unfortunately I still get notifications and most of your comments are lies.Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 2:16 pmYet he continues to engage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performat ... tradiction
I am putting the effort because you are worth my time. Because I believe I can teach you to think for yourself. Something that you seem incapable of doing presently.
Of course, it always boils down to choice. Only If you want to.
And that's all I could ever ask. Think for youself.
Don't mind him. He's just scared of not knowing.
I'm always intrigued with your ideas about replicating consciousness because I'm generally interested in the subject of consciousness.
Yes! I want to win. And in this case - teaching you ANYTHING is winning.
What you are doing with your constant obscurantism, secretive intentions, failing to acknowledge error is you undermining effective communication. And when you fuck with communication you are setting everybody up for failure."Rationalists should win," I said, and I may have to stop saying it, for it seems to convey something other than what I meant by it.
But I don't try to effectively communicate with you, you have nothing to offer and you understand almost nothing. Why can't you just stop replying to my comments and get lost?Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2019 2:27 pmYes! I want to win. And in this case - teaching you ANYTHING is winning.
Because living in a world with smarter people benefits me and it benefits you.
If you are going to read one thing about rationality in your life read this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ARtkT3 ... ed-winning
Rationality is Systematized Winning
What you are doing with your constant obscurantism, secretive intentions, failing to acknowledge error is you undermining effective communication. And when you fuck with communication you are setting everybody up for failure."Rationalists should win," I said, and I may have to stop saying it, for it seems to convey something other than what I meant by it.
Byzantine failures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault
YOU don't want to win. YOU want to fail! That's why you are playing these silly sophistry games philosophers like to play.
Keep on ignoring!
I understand how to navigate Byzantine failures in reasoning. You don't.
Why indeed.
It's not my job to know anything about your mind. It's yours.
But on the whole, it seems to me that what I know about my mind is far more than you know about yours.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ARtkT3 ... ed-winning
If the "irrational" agent is outcompeting you on a systematic and predictable basis, then it is time to reconsider what you think is "rational".
For I do fear that a "rationalist" will clutch to themselves the ritual of cognition they have been taught, as loss after loss piles up, consoling themselves: "I have behaved virtuously, I have been so reasonable, it's just this awful unfair universe that doesn't give me what I deserve. The others are cheating by not doing it the rational way, that's how they got ahead of me."