M Ls

"We don’t really know what human values are"

But we might, or might begin to:  I put the effor tin over here :: Alignment ⑥ Values are an effort not a coin https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/alignment-values-are-an-effort-not

or in derived format: If all values are an effort, prices are a meeting of efforts https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/if-all-values-are-an-effort-prices

even deontological positions are an effort, evolution cares about the effort, not the ideal forms

The first realisation here moving forward, is that religion is a subset of something else… —and not a thing-in-itself that needs to be explained /selected for. This something else is the inchoate urge "to should", "to world the self with a self in the world among others". I realised this ten years ago, https://www.academia.edu/40978261/Why_we_should_an_introduction_by_memoir_into_the_implications_of_the_Egalitarian_Revolution_of_the_Paleolithic_or_Anyone_for_cake

and write on it at my substack https://whyweshould.substack.com/

any commonalties are the result of worlding in the world, in a framework of big history, in which the thickets of metaphysics are dense, grand and commodious, ready to support any world we should feel it good to espouse.

Convergence is a thing.

Evolution don't care about the outcomes (art/religion/polity/morality) merely that we should, and thus make mistakes and learn.

Like in an examination for most of us. That's why we fail in the time allowed.

People who count do not understand their power. Except Sesame Steet's 'The Count', and then he discovers crypto and it all turns to paranoid mush.

I really enjoyed reading this palmistry.

Reading you on Buber : Buber seems to mistake dissolution as a soteriological goal, which it could be I guess. but is not a required goal in very many buddhisms. I would consider doubling-down on this mistake a bit of slur.  Dissolution might be an acceptable outcome as an insight, but this does not preclude engagement as a pathway to enlightenment.

I say this as a fellow traveller with neo-Pyrrhonism, but who does not have a soteriological bone in my body.

Encounter is the thing of course. https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/if-the-world-is-a-thing-we-have-made

Good fable. If we swap out the diamond macguffin for logic itself, it's a whole new level of Gödelian pain, can weak bias priors iterations catch this out? Some argue analogue intuitions live through these formal paradox gardens this but my own intuition doubts this... maybe my intuition is too formal, who knows?

Also some "intuitions" are heavily resisted to forgetting about the diamond because they want it badly, and then their measures used to collect data often interfere with the sense of the world and thus reality. I suspect "general intelligence" and "race" are examples of these pursuits (separately and together)(I think they mean smarts and populations but proponents hate that). Thus AGI is  a possible goose chase, especially when we are the measure of all things looking for greener pastures. This is how cognitive dissonance is possible in otherwise non-narcissistic members of humanity.

Also, beware of any enterprise that requires new clothes, this applies even if you are not an emperor.

Shiny diamond negligees in particular.

back link https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/all-logic-is-a-prior

All logic is a prior.