= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Is there some reason this article hasn't been promoted to the frontpage?
If people agree on what the term means, and they can read a book and detect (or not) colonial alienation, and thus have a test for post-utopianism, and different people will reach the same conclusions about any given book
By hypothesis, none of those things are true. If those things happen to be true for "post-utopianism" in the real world, substitute a different word that people use inconsistently and doesn't refer to anything useful.
But, from the article:
you can nonetheless take many literary professors and separately show them new pieces of writing by unknown authors and they'll all independently arrive at the same answer, in which case they're clearly detecting some sensory-visible feature of the writing.
Seems like what I was saying...
In response to
The Useful Idea of Truth
I don't understand the part about post-utopianism being meaningless. If people agree on what the term means, and they can read a book and detect (or not) colonial alienation, and thus have a test for post-utopianism, and different people will reach the same conclusions about any given book, then how exactly is the term meaningless?
Normal people define "true" as "good enough; not worth looking at too closely". Nerds define "true" as "irrefutable even by the highest-level nerd you are likely to encounter in this context." Hence more or less all of Western philosophy, theology, science, etc.; and hence normal people's acceptance that contradictory things can be "true" at the same time.
(Yes, I'm problematizing your contrast between various groups you dislike and "normal people".)
and hence normal people's acceptance that nerd-contradictory things can be normal-"true" at the same time.
Namespaced that for you.
Does the function perform as imagined, or does it lead to new issues?
Romeo brought up a great point, that it may have been a psychological barrier.
It leads to annoyance for me. Whenever you switch into a tab, it starts loading (from the point of view of someone who wasn't aware the page hadn't loaded, it seemed to be reloading). As soon as I saw BrassLion's post, I went into the options and disabled it.
In response to
Roommate interest and coordination thread
I'm moving to Seattle in September. If you're looking to move in that area, send me a PM or comment.
In response to
What are you working on? August 2012
I have a PhD in physics.
Got one of those, too, and my opinion is basically the same, except for the MWI advocacy, which takes away from the QM sequence's usefulness (advocacy always does).
In a nutshell:
There are no particles, only fields (described by amplitudes evolving in space, time and other coordinates). Particles/waves show up as pattern matching to classical concepts, depending on the experiments.
The measurement step (the Born rule) is still mysterious (i.e. an open problem in Physics), despite what anyone, including EY, says. Hence the dozens of "interpretations".
despite what anyone, including EY, says.
I'm pretty sure I recall that EY says (repeatedly) that the Born rule is not yet understood.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Koan 3:
Does the idea that everything is made of causes and effects meaningfully constrain experience? Can you coherently say how reality might look, if our universe did not have the kind of structure that appears in a causal model?
It would be completely random, with all events being equally likely at every point in time. It would have no history, since the past has no effect on the present or future