The first half of the post was very interesting, I was not aware of Simmel’s theory before. There’s a tenuous analogy to those quips about Expertise being nothing more than accumulating every possible mistake in a narrow field, i.e. knowing what not to do. If you can throttle your choices based on those negative possibilities, you might have the same success as an expert.
I will shamefully admit I didn’t have the patience to read Steve Byrnes post, and why I understand broadly that the problem with the free will dichotomy is having a bunch of negatives, but not having a positive definition to hang those negatives onto. And perhaps that’s why the second half of your post just didn’t communicate to me. But that’s likely a reader/me-problem.
The first half of the post was very interesting, I was not aware of Simmel’s theory before. There’s a tenuous analogy to those quips about Expertise being nothing more than accumulating every possible mistake in a narrow field, i.e. knowing what not to do. If you can throttle your choices based on those negative possibilities, you might have the same success as an expert.
I will shamefully admit I didn’t have the patience to read Steve Byrnes post, and why I understand broadly that the problem with the free will dichotomy is having a bunch of negatives, but not having a positive definition to hang those negatives onto. And perhaps that’s why the second half of your post just didn’t communicate to me. But that’s likely a reader/me-problem.
Thanks for your feedback! If you have any thought on how the second part could communicate better to you, I’m all ears.