I would say they are, in the worst instances a kind of sazen, and in the best instances recognizably enough jargon that they dodge the illusion of transparency being double. Similarly, the word “sazen” is not centrally sazen, because nobody’s going to look at it and go “oh I think I know what that means”.
I was sazened by the word Sazen when i saw Duncan use it on facebook, and though i understood it. to my defense i say that now i believe this word does not carve reality at the joints, and that folk wisdom and what-sazen-should-mean are two different, distinct things.
i want to write not short post that explains my own map of the sazen-adjusting part of ConceptSpace, so i postpone my longer response until i will write it. my map of it all now is that you throw bunch of very different things into this one concept, that i separate to different concepts—that should be treated differently. when i unpack folk wisdom i feel like now i understand it BETTER—but my core understanding remain the same. if someone will tell me Duncan is writer and teacher (And not Second Foundation Rationalist—which is how i think about you) i will suspect it unfriendly attempt at deception—or more likely, stupid joke, that play exactly on the fact this description is the sort that described in folk wisdom as “half true—whole lie”
folk wisdom, in my experience, is much more similar to the lossy compression picture then the sazen one—when i gained understanding, i feel like the fold wisdom pointer point exactly in the right direction, and what was missed is the emotional understanding. the picture representing it will be black-white version of the same picture. (and i don’t call it lossy compression, nor i find this concept useful). it’s different from the sazen as the picture that contains some distinct features that let you recognize it if you know what someone is talking about.
but i don’t want to start this discussion now—it’s better that i will write my own post first.
Would you say “jargon-laden sentences” are, in the best instances, a kind of sazen?
I would, yeah.
I would say they are, in the worst instances a kind of sazen, and in the best instances recognizably enough jargon that they dodge the illusion of transparency being double. Similarly, the word “sazen” is not centrally sazen, because nobody’s going to look at it and go “oh I think I know what that means”.
I was sazened by the word Sazen when i saw Duncan use it on facebook, and though i understood it. to my defense i say that now i believe this word does not carve reality at the joints, and that folk wisdom and what-sazen-should-mean are two different, distinct things.
My claim is that folk wisdom is a subset of sazen. It is one of the many places where the sazen-pattern appears.
I agree that they are distinct, as subsets are often distinct from the larger set.
i want to write not short post that explains my own map of the sazen-adjusting part of ConceptSpace, so i postpone my longer response until i will write it. my map of it all now is that you throw bunch of very different things into this one concept, that i separate to different concepts—that should be treated differently. when i unpack folk wisdom i feel like now i understand it BETTER—but my core understanding remain the same. if someone will tell me Duncan is writer and teacher (And not Second Foundation Rationalist—which is how i think about you) i will suspect it unfriendly attempt at deception—or more likely, stupid joke, that play exactly on the fact this description is the sort that described in folk wisdom as “half true—whole lie”
folk wisdom, in my experience, is much more similar to the lossy compression picture then the sazen one—when i gained understanding, i feel like the fold wisdom pointer point exactly in the right direction, and what was missed is the emotional understanding. the picture representing it will be black-white version of the same picture. (and i don’t call it lossy compression, nor i find this concept useful). it’s different from the sazen as the picture that contains some distinct features that let you recognize it if you know what someone is talking about.
but i don’t want to start this discussion now—it’s better that i will write my own post first.