Good points with the checkmarks, the question of communication here is how to convey nuance in a way that is useful and carves reality at its joints. In philosophy it can be useful to do a sort of necessary and sufficient diagram and that was kind of the inspiration for that.
I’m not really sure how to model it in a simplifying, levels of coarse graining and all that.
It’s quite funny with the agency is frame-dependent as I literally link to it to in the post :D
Finally for the point around the anchoring bias, I agree to some extent and the one worry that I have is that it can be hard to relate the expression that someones makes to underlying theories and a frame that can be combined with other fields without having an existing idea of where to project the information to. So it’s this trade-off between the purity of the information and the directedness one can bring to the questions.
Good points with the checkmarks, the question of communication here is how to convey nuance in a way that is useful and carves reality at its joints. In philosophy it can be useful to do a sort of necessary and sufficient diagram and that was kind of the inspiration for that.
I’m not really sure how to model it in a simplifying, levels of coarse graining and all that.
It’s quite funny with the agency is frame-dependent as I literally link to it to in the post :D
Finally for the point around the anchoring bias, I agree to some extent and the one worry that I have is that it can be hard to relate the expression that someones makes to underlying theories and a frame that can be combined with other fields without having an existing idea of where to project the information to. So it’s this trade-off between the purity of the information and the directedness one can bring to the questions.