Craig_Heldreth comments on Rational Romantic Relationships, Part 1: Relationship Styles and Attraction Basics - Less Wrong

48 Post author: lukeprog 05 November 2011 11:06AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (1529)
Tags: relationships self-help

Comments (1529)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Craig_Heldreth 10 November 2011 05:20:33PM 0 points [-]

My own view is that the sole difference between the two is that science commands you to suspend judgment until the null hypothesis is under p=0.05, at least for the purposes of what is allowed into the scientific canon as provisional fact, and Bayesians are more comfortable making bets with greater degrees of uncertainty.

Are you familiar with Michael Polanyi Personal Knowledge?

His view is only slightly more strict, yet he arrives at some very different conclusions. For example, under your framework Rhine's ESP experiments are scientific hypothesis tests, and under his they are illogical. I am not convinced by Polanyi, but it is far from clear to me how you could show he is wrong. If you know how to show he is wrong and could explain that in a couple paragraphs (or point me to such a document) I would be very interested in reading it.

Comment author: PhilosophyTutor 11 November 2011 12:50:59AM 0 points [-]

Are you familiar with Michael Polanyi Personal Knowledge?

I'm not familiar with his work, unfortunately.

However a quote from one of the reviews concerns me. The reviewer says:

The author furnishes a thought provoking analysis that demonstrates the sufficiency (perhaps not the necessity) of a pseudo-kantian mindset that makes intelligibility possible. Reductionists, various materialists, physicalists, and sundry naturalists will recoil at the prospect that universal immutable immaterial concepts, forms, and laws are essential epistemic conditions for human experience.

If that's Polanyi's position it seems both kooky and not immediately relevant to the topic, so unless you can take a shot at explaining what you think Polanyi's insights are that are relevant to the topic at hand I think we should drop this and take it up elsewhere or by other means if you want to talk about it further.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit