Viewing profile — TheAncientGeek

But rationalism , if the modern sort, isn't supposed to be descriptive, it's supposed to be normative -- rationality lets you win.

Liberal and orthodox.

It can't be that different, either, or our senses would be of no practical use.

For naturalistic libertarians , free.will is.partly constituted by indtermimksm, not something entirely different.

Also, mandatory scriptures and group hiouses.

Analytical philosophy is rationalism done right.

There isn't a single philosophical meaning. You are probably thinking of libertarian free will..furthering Obviously false because determinism isn't obviously true.

>actually, this is obviously correct Nobody know what's actually correct, because you have to solve epistemology first, and you have to solve epistemology to solve epistemology...e…

It's not just Moshowitz a lot of them have the same syndome.

. Popperians claim that positive justification is impossible. Popperians claim.Induction doesn't exist (or at least , matter in science) Popper was prepared to consider the existen…

Several different definitions are being bandied about. If you think of reduction as understanding a material system in terms of its components, biology is now reductionist, having …

That's a practical limitation. There's no barrier in principle to a complete reduction.

Well, you can get it from LessWrong and , even mire, Yudkowsky. Rationalism has overall and orthodox wings

There's a lot of weird ideas on the fringes of EA...but they are on the fringes. Everyone is eye rolling at shrimp guy. https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/5JB4dn7hEvZCYDvCe/a-very-…

Bullet biting.

https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/dTkWWhQkgxePxbtPE/no-logi...

There is no local realism. That doesn't at all add up to all-in-the-head idealism.

Randomness based free will still gives you a non-inevitable future.