I don’t care who calls themselves what, complexity science calls itself anti-reductionist, I don’t dismiss them. Therefore I can’t dismiss people just because they call themselves anti-reductionist, I must use their actual arguments to evaluate their positions.
I will also say that pleading to the community’s intrinsic bias and claiming I’ve made arguments I haven’t or have positions I don’t is not doing much to make me think you less a crank.
I don’t think you’re using the actual arguments I presented in the LDSL series to evaluate my position.
I remember reading LDSL and not buying the arguments! At the time, I deeply respected you and your thinking, and thought “oh well I’m not buying these arguments, but surely if they’re as useful as they say, tailcalled will apply them to various circumstances and that will be pie on my face, and in that circumstance I should try to figure out why I was mistaken”. But then you didn’t, and you started vague-posting constantly, and now we’re here and you’re giving excuse after excuse of why its actually impossible for you to tell me any concrete application of your theory, and accusing me of anti-reductionist prejudice.
I admit, I do have an anti-reductionist prejudice, its called a prior, but its not absolute, and its not enough to stop listening to someone. I really, really, really don’t think I’m outright dismissing you because you’re anti-reductionist. I was totally willing to listen to you, even when you were making such arguments, and end up being wrong!
I even have the receipts to prove it! Until like just under a month ago, I was still emailed & lesswrong notified every time you made a post!
(they are unread, because I check LessWrong more commonly than my email)
I cannot stress enough, the reason why I’m dismissing you is because you stopped making arguments and started constantly vague-posting.
I don’t care who calls themselves what, complexity science calls itself anti-reductionist, I don’t dismiss them. Therefore I can’t dismiss people just because they call themselves anti-reductionist, I must use their actual arguments to evaluate their positions.
I will also say that pleading to the community’s intrinsic bias and claiming I’ve made arguments I haven’t or have positions I don’t is not doing much to make me think you less a crank.
I’m not saying you’re dismissing me because I call myself anti-reductionist, I’m saying you’re dismissing me because I am an anti-reductionist.
I don’t think you’re using the actual arguments I presented in the LDSL series to evaluate my position.
I remember reading LDSL and not buying the arguments! At the time, I deeply respected you and your thinking, and thought “oh well I’m not buying these arguments, but surely if they’re as useful as they say, tailcalled will apply them to various circumstances and that will be pie on my face, and in that circumstance I should try to figure out why I was mistaken”. But then you didn’t, and you started vague-posting constantly, and now we’re here and you’re giving excuse after excuse of why its actually impossible for you to tell me any concrete application of your theory, and accusing me of anti-reductionist prejudice.
I admit, I do have an anti-reductionist prejudice, its called a prior, but its not absolute, and its not enough to stop listening to someone. I really, really, really don’t think I’m outright dismissing you because you’re anti-reductionist. I was totally willing to listen to you, even when you were making such arguments, and end up being wrong!
I even have the receipts to prove it! Until like just under a month ago, I was still emailed & lesswrong notified every time you made a post!
(they are unread, because I check LessWrong more commonly than my email)
I cannot stress enough, the reason why I’m dismissing you is because you stopped making arguments and started constantly vague-posting.