You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Dahlen comments on Open thread, 11-17 August 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: David_Gerard 11 August 2014 10:12AM

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

Comments (268)

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

Comment author: Dahlen 14 August 2014 04:04:37PM 1 point [-]

I rediscovered most of the more widely agreed upon ontological categories (minus one that I still don't believe to adhere to the definition) before I knew they were called that, at about the age of 17. The idea of researching them came to me after reading a question from some stupid personality quiz they gave us in high school, something like "If you were a color, which color would you be?" -- and something about it rubbed me the wrong way, it just felt ontologically wrong, conflating entities with properties like that. (Yes, I did get the intended meaning of the question, I wasn't that much of an Aspie even back then, but I could also see it in the other, more literal way.)

I remember it was in the same afternoon that I also split up the verb "to be" into its constituent meanings, and named them. It seemed related.