The relentless honesty of Ludwig Wittgenstein (2017)

Absolutely! I truly don't want to come across as that downvote seeking troll. I really want to share and engage in rich conversations with interesting people online.

I really appreciate your feedback. I think you touched on a key point of contention for me that I need to work very hard on:

> if you don't spend effort in writing, why should I spend so much effort in reading?

I come at this from precisely the opposite angle: "I could pour my heart into something and have it ignored because it's too long, so I'm just going to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks."

Obviously, I know this is a poor solution. I'm actually building a website instead that I believe solves my problem and many more. That will give me the motivation required to put in the effort up front to polish things up a bit more.

The problem, for me, boils down to one thing: we have a content discovery problem. Low energy bullshit rises easily, while content that takes a while to parse rises quite quickly.

The saying "a picture is worth a thousand words" is perfect here. It's also roughly 1,000 times more difficult to read, parse, understand, and provide feedback for content such as mine than to like a gif on Reddit, for example.

Again, thank you for the feedback. I've copied it into my notes (highly recommend Bear app for mac / iOS if you're in the market) and will meditate on it and hopefully improve through it.

If you're interested in the project I'm working on that I believe solves this problem, here's some stuff I wrote about it:

https://medium.com/@michaellustig/knophy-or-how-were-going-t...

https://medium.com/@michaellustig/step-by-step-explanation-o...

>I think they mean that the unedited, the stream-of-consciousness style you're employing, while "honest" in that you give the reader the the full paper trail of where your conclusions are coming from, has a low signal-to-noise ratio, making it tedious to read.

Certainly fair, great point!

>If you're looking for more feedback, I would suggest that you read. Read orders of magnitude more than you write, in fact, no matter how much you write. No matter how old or how experienced you are, philosophy is a party that has been going on for thousands of years and you have only just arrived. There is always more to read, and for any novel idea or theory you have that is keeping you up at night pondering it, there is almost certainly someone whose entire life's work was dedicated to the exploration of that one idea.

Whenever I am not working, spending time with my wife, or writing, I am reading or listening to books or podcasts on philosophy, thinking, history, etc. Great recommendation.

>Gödel's incompleteness theorems say about the foundations of math, but you gotta do the work to get there.

Have you heard of GEB? Fascinating you'd make that connection here. We could almost call that a Golden Braid on its own.

>Read history. Read about propaganda campaigns and why they worked, and past instances of "information radiation". Look up all the 20th century theorists who warned us about the power of television to make even the most horrific atrocities banal. It's all been said before.

Please point me to some reading about exactly what atrocities they warned of. I'd love to read more. I never claim any ideas are new, as I don't really believe that to be possible. Rather, there are no new ideas under the sun. This points at a more deeply ceded philosophy that we won't get to in this conversation.

>Contributing new thought is hard work, and one of the reasons why it is hard work is that you have to first understand the entire conversation that had been already happening right up until you joined the party.

If you provide any more feedback for me here, PLEASE, let me know where something like I'm working on has been done before as I'm searching far and wide for help.

https://medium.com/@michaellustig/knophy-or-how-were-going-t...

https://medium.com/@michaellustig/step-by-step-explanation-o...

Shouldn't philosopher seek truth and knowledge rather then one-on-one competition of quick wit and reaction?

Thanks to that post I discovered after a short research that I share a lot with Wittgenstein personality-wise. I'm not sure if it's a good or a bad sign. Never heard about him before.