You raised the question of whether X refers to
As far as I can tell, you are the one who invented "X", no? I never said I need it, just pointed out certain flaws with it.
I hope we can agree that the proper thing to do with a meaningless question is to point out why it's meaningless and otherwise ignore it.
I suppose it is not meaningless in any model that includes X, and the one I favor does not. I hope we agree on at least that much.
Tapping out.
Today's post, When Science Can't Help was originally published on 15 May 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):
Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).
This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was Science Doesn't Trust Your Rationality, and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.
Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.