Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

(Of course all this can be applied to “beliefs” about our own minds, if we consider influences coming from our minds as if it were something outside, from other influences.)

This sentence literally doesn't parse. Here's my reconstruction:

Say it's a belief about some aspect of your mind. Then the parts of your mind responsible for A may be different from the aspect you're trying to grasp (B1). But I would definitely label any spurious influences due to non-B1 parts of my mind as being A. Unless the intent in such cases is to adopt the convention that A is only about the things that are idiosyncratic to us; that if there's some near-universal fact about human minds, then it should be called B2 instead. I guess that would be fine.

I also felt like Robin implied that differences in A are acceptable (or at least irreconcilable). But A-differences aren't necessarily benign. There are defects in our (individual and shared) nature that disturb me.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

mjgeddes:similarity + complexity = ? (new type of information theory tracking internal beliefs?)

How about:similarity + complexity = channel theory (an existing form of information theory tracking channel components)

Expand full comment
27 more comments...

No posts