Comment author: Jade 20 August 2012 03:41:13PM *  -1 points [-]

Looking "good" is still based on priors, which in anorexics, vegans, and ascetics usually involve perceptions of costs their brains subconsciously figure would be reduced if people ate less, ate less meat, or consumed less of everything.
Some vegans feel disgust when thinking of meat, even lab meat
"Disgust as embodied moral judgment"

Generally, all signaling is good from the perspective of the signaler's brain, which may be updated, like when Buddha left groups of ascetics to continue optimizing.

Comment author: Jade 20 August 2012 03:01:33PM *  0 points [-]

One reason for privileging the laws of physics is revealed to be the product of a confused metaphysical picture.

I have a fix for others' "confused metaphysical pictures." It's another (moving) picture: an updated, more complex, dynamic version of Powers of Ten (that includes info that came out of different humans and at least one non-human animal and a computer -- to convey perspectivism). But it's in my head and I don't have the skills to express it through multimedia production & distribution. Help?

Comment author: Armok_GoB 17 July 2011 07:41:14PM -1 points [-]

Well, that's what they usually ends up asking eventually, but I don't like answering a different question than the one actually asked due to how many won't notice. It feels like dark arts.

Comment author: Jade 25 July 2011 10:07:33PM *  3 points [-]

When asked for favorites or 'what do you like to do for fun,' I offer recommendations (for myself and/or the questioner). Or, to help the questioner generate recommendations, I give recent likes, potential likes, and/or liked/disliked characteristics. This way, we have ideas of what to do in the future and don't get stuck on past interests or activities that have become boring. The NY Times website also uses the word “recommend,” instead of “like,” on its Facebook-share button. [If you didn’t know this already: information about your preferences may be used by another’s (esp. a stranger’s) brain to calibrate how much to associate with or help you; see for example “Musical Taste and Ingroup Favouritism:” http://gpi.sagepub.com/content/12/3/319.abstract.]

"Why did you do that?" --> "Multiple factors..."

"What will you do" or "What should you do?"--> "Depends..."

In response to In Praise of Boredom
Comment author: Emile 18 January 2009 05:21:05PM 2 points [-]

... and if you consider the class of "subconscious activities done in order to reach another goal", you'll see that if covers both "low-level" stuff like breathing, and "high-level" stuff like thinking (or at least, the mechanics of thinking - retrieving memories, updating beliefs, etc.). So you get one category instead of two.

In response to comment by Emile on In Praise of Boredom
Comment author: Jade 28 March 2011 09:50:12PM *  0 points [-]

Another way to get one category instead of two... Think of boredom as a signal of not incorporating new, useful physical info. Breathing and thinking (usefully) are not boring because those processes facilitate the body's exploitation or incorporation of physical info. In other words, boredom arises from a lack of novelty on the level of physics, though the process of breathing may seem repetitive or non-novel on the level of biomechanics.

View more: Prev