Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: ron_purewal 15 March 2008 02:22:00AM 0 points [-]

just fyi, there's no such thing as the 'eldest' of two boys; there's just an elder and a younger. superlatives are reserved for groups of three or more.

as i'm a midget among giants here, i'm afraid that's all i have to add. :)

Comment author: ron_purewal 21 February 2008 09:49:48AM 1 point [-]

Reality is very large - just the part we can see is billions of lightyears across.


a poster above has already noted the irony here: the term 'reality' is just as susceptible to equivocal use as is 'sound' or 'art'.**

what is reality, after all, if not 'the part we can see'? (by 'see' i am of course including _all_ means of detection, from literal sensory awareness to circumstantial inference.) indeed, it's dicey to posit the existence of any 'reality' independent of our own consciousness. as richard dawkins has said, even the most seemingly incontrovertible truths - like the heat of the desert and the hardness of rocks - are only so because of our own evolutionary adaptations. i.e., we feel rocks as hard only because our brains have created 'hardness' as a way of rationalizing our quantum interactions with rocks.


on a separate note, it's amazing how much bigger northern california (and that means _northern_ california - the cold part with the big trees) looks when one flips the map of california so that south faces up. (i will not commit the fallacy of referring to this orientation as 'upside down'.)

**er, sorry, i meant 'that which is deemed to have value unrelated to practical utility'