https://appendicesandomissions.substack.com/p/sex-and-moral-sight I can’t exactly get worked up about the subtleties here; yes, the erotic imagination sometimes flattens the person it’s supposedly about. But so does every way of relating to a person other than deep interpersonal communion. You can transact with them, you can ignore them, you can hate them or idealize them, and in no case are you really seeing the “whole person.”
why doesn’t science focus on building elite teams that work together over the long term?
Maybe it’s downstream from science being intertwined with education, and that in education cooperation is considered cheating? Also, maybe it’s about power: the elite teams would gain too much power relative to the organization that created them, so the organizations don’t do that for political reasons?
the erotic imagination sometimes flattens the person it’s supposedly about. But so does every way of relating to a person other than deep interpersonal communion.
Exactly. The author says “When I reflect on past relationships, I find myself bothered frequently by the thought that they did not really love, like, or, for that matter, even know “me.”” but isn’t this basically existentialism or something like that?
I don’t feel like anyone actually knows me, and the best I can hope for is people who are willing to listen when for some reason I want to expose to them a specific aspect of myself. But even then, exposing all aspects would take an insane amount of time; it could possibly happen to long-term partners over decades, but even there some details would be missing.
“she gave me reasons she liked me that were vaguely me-shaped— “You’re smart, funny, etc.” But not very particular and I found this entirely unsatisfying. [...] plenty of people are smart, funny and so on.” Well, it could be worse. I once got “because you have blue eyes” for an answer; I would prefer to be called smart and funny! Anyway, this raises the bar even higher: people should perfectly know each other even before they start dating?
links 8/20/25: https://roamresearch.com/#/app/srcpublic/page/08-20-2025
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell_(1995_film) kinda want to see this
https://appendicesandomissions.substack.com/p/sex-and-moral-sight I can’t exactly get worked up about the subtleties here; yes, the erotic imagination sometimes flattens the person it’s supposedly about. But so does every way of relating to a person other than deep interpersonal communion. You can transact with them, you can ignore them, you can hate them or idealize them, and in no case are you really seeing the “whole person.”
https://www.predictableinnovation.com/methods/crossing-the-chasm-framework-mistakes
misconceptions about the “Crossing the Chasm” framework.
https://developers.google.com/fonts/faq
https://austinvernon.substack.com/p/expanding-the-universal-marginal Austin Vernon on solar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrovague pejorative word for monks without cloisters
https://www.reinvent.science/p/teams-and-coaches why doesn’t science focus on building elite teams that work together over the long term?
https://asteriskmag.com/issues/05/the-ruin-of-mumbai Mumbai has slums in part because it has terrible zoning
Yeah, Ghost in the Shell is nice.
Maybe it’s downstream from science being intertwined with education, and that in education cooperation is considered cheating? Also, maybe it’s about power: the elite teams would gain too much power relative to the organization that created them, so the organizations don’t do that for political reasons?
Exactly. The author says “When I reflect on past relationships, I find myself bothered frequently by the thought that they did not really love, like, or, for that matter, even know “me.”” but isn’t this basically existentialism or something like that?
I don’t feel like anyone actually knows me, and the best I can hope for is people who are willing to listen when for some reason I want to expose to them a specific aspect of myself. But even then, exposing all aspects would take an insane amount of time; it could possibly happen to long-term partners over decades, but even there some details would be missing.
“she gave me reasons she liked me that were vaguely me-shaped— “You’re smart, funny, etc.” But not very particular and I found this entirely unsatisfying. [...] plenty of people are smart, funny and so on.” Well, it could be worse. I once got “because you have blue eyes” for an answer; I would prefer to be called smart and funny! Anyway, this raises the bar even higher: people should perfectly know each other even before they start dating?