Always glad to see pragmatism represented on LW. I feel like rationalist types instinctively lean towards a correspondence theory of truth, but I feel like as a group, they are actually (or at least, could be) more sympathetic to the pragmatist view of truth than they realized.
This post follows pretty closely the argument I was going to make in a LW-targeted defence of pragmatism of my own which I had been half-heartedly planning to post for a long time. Thanks for doing a good job of it.
Is it worth buying a more recent edition for the preface?
I'm just starting to read the 20th-anniversary edition (from 1999 I think) and he states in the preface that even the typos haven't been corrected.
But the preface is extensive and interesting, and contains his updated thoughts on several aspects of the book.
Perhaps "Collating widely available time/money trades" from November 2012?
That's the ticket! Thanks so much.
Don't see it, but this might be inspiring: http://fourhourworkweek.com/outsourcing-life/
Weird; I'm starting to wonder whether I imagined the whole thing. Your link helps, at least, though. Thanks.
I seem to recall a discussion thread about ways one can spend money to save time (e.g. paying to get one's laundry done), together with estimates for their respective dollar/hour rates. I'm moving from unemployed to full-time employment this week, so the appropriate dollar value of my time is about to shift dramatically, and as such, I'd like to give this thread another look over, but I can't find it. Can anyone else remember what I'm talking about and/or provide a link? Thanks.
It's based on a Harvet Ismuth play. You know he used to say when you anthropomorphize objects - you unanthropomorphize people. Makes you think.
--"Fabulous Prizes", Dresden Codak
And, while we're on the subject, here's a classic:
Let me see if I understand your thesis. You think we shouldn't anthropomorphize people?
-- Sidney Morgenbesser to B. F. Skinner
(via Eliezer, natch.)
View more: Next
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
On putting all one's charitable eggs in one basket:
I note that GiveWell recommend splitting one's charitable giving between their top charities in a certain ratio. But it seems that this would reduce the expected value of one's giving. Is this considered by others to be the best way to donate, or is it better to give all of one's donation to that single charity estimated to be most effective? I imagine this is the sort of thing that has already been discussed, so pointers to any previous discussion would be of use.