Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

henrikkarlsson.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 115 posts

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#31

Post by keybored »

satvikpendem wrote: post #27
keybored wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the assumptions (and the metaphor) contained in that response of yours seems to contradict the statement itself. By using “just” you’ve already asserted that there is nothing more of relative importance to figure out—it’s done, figured out.

Yes, by using "just," it is a thought terminating word. However, again, I do believe we have it figured out, based on how we understand the rest of the universe to be physically-based as well. It is, in my experience, human arrogance that leads us to believe that we are somehow more than physical structures. It makes people feel uneasy to believe that so they invent something to solve that cognitive dissonance.

The relevant comparison isn’t to people who think we are “more than physical structures”. It is to people who are a bit humbled by the complexity of the world and how when you seem to learn something new about it, ten more questions pop up. Which must be a forced attitude that some scientists have.

Contrast that with the arrogance of creating a neural network in your garage and thinking to yourself: “well I guess as a side-effect of this all of existence makes sense now.”

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#32

Post by satvikpendem »

pjc50 wrote: post #28
skummetmaelk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are very good at pretending we are more than just biological machines acting according to genetically imposed network structure refined by lifetime history of training inputs.

You could believe that, and it might even be true, but it's no way to live your life.

One does not imply the other. Just because they say the above does not mean they actually live their life like that.

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#33

Post by satvikpendem »

keybored wrote: post #31
satvikpendem wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, by using "just," it is a thought terminating word. However, again, I do believe we have it figured out, based on how we understand the rest of the universe to be physically-based as well. It is, in my experience, human arrogance that leads us to believe that we are somehow more than physical structures. It makes people feel uneasy to believe that so they invent something to solve that cognitive dissonance.

The relevant comparison isn’t to people who think we are “more than physical structures”. It is to people who are a bit humbled by the complexity of the world and how when you seem to learn something new about it, ten more questions pop up. Which must be a forced attitude that some scientists have. Contrast that with the arrogance of creating a neural network in your garage and thinking to yourself: “well I guess as…

None of that relates to what I said though. Physicalists do continue to do research of the natural world, in fact, that is actually what drives them more toward physicalism! I think you are arguing a strawman, since no one said anything about being arrogant.

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#34

Post by InDubioProRubio »

keybored wrote: post #19
skummetmaelk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are very good at pretending we are more than just biological machines acting according to genetically imposed network structure refined by lifetime history of training inputs.

Nerds are good at pretending they understand everything by way of reductionist metaphors.

I prefer mimicry of understanding attempts to defensive aggression against anything new and "threatening". One has the chance to develop into actually understanding, given time

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#35

Post by nonrandomstring »

pjc50 wrote: post #28
skummetmaelk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are very good at pretending we are more than just biological machines acting according to genetically imposed network structure refined by lifetime history of training inputs.

You could believe that, and it might even be true, but it's no way to live your life.

I'm not sure deflationary statements like this are "beliefs", rather defence mechanisms to truncate further difficult thought.

The article has some extraordinary demands; radical openness, reflective practice, co-evolution, mentalisation... all things you'd associate with high emotional intelligence and hard inner work.

Some people just aren't up to that. Maybe we need to be able to say "that's okay". Humanists need not feel threatened by reductionists any more than reductionists need feel upset there is a bigger world "outside the test-tube".

Perhaps we should focus more on why some life-stances expressed by others feel uncomfortable for us.

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#36

Post by keybored »

InDubioProRubio wrote: post #34
keybored wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nerds are good at pretending they understand everything by way of reductionist metaphors.

I prefer mimicry of understanding attempts to defensive aggression against anything new and "threatening". One has the chance to develop into actually understanding, given time

I don’t even know what you are talking about.

Both of our comments are equally aggressive since I mimicked the delivery.

> to defensive aggression against anything new and "threatening".

What’s new. You can take this back to Cartesian Dualism (or further) where animals where just “machines”. Same thing: oh we have these levers that we’ve made and understand, huh I guess rabbits and storks work the same because why not?

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#37

Post by thelibertines »

This was such a fun read! A sweet blend of poetry, anecdote, and Relational Ontology. Or maybe even Dialogical Philosophy?!

The themes, such as "Two truths approach each other. One comes from inside, the other from outside" remind me greatly of other great reads:

- Martin Buber's "I-Thou" relationship emphasizes genuine, reciprocal interactions, where the self becomes fully realized through mutual presence and connection with the other. See: I and Thou (1923)

- Hegel's concept of recognition (Anerkennung) highlights that self-consciousness and identity are developed through a dialectical process of mutual acknowledgment between self and other. See: Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)

Leaving this here for those interested in these concepts

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#38

Post by nonrandomstring »

keybored wrote: post #18
mijustin wrote: post #2

These were the crucial bits for me: > "Sundays are for listing everything that went wrong during the week on the blackboard we painted on the wall of my study, so we can figure out what needs to change." and > "I liked to think about our life as a piece of software. We had our routines and our principles, this was the code. We ran the code by living it. The list on the blackboard was the bug log, a record of the ways…

There’s nothing more boring than someone who explains everything according to their passion-hobby or work. - Programmer: my life is a program - Marathoner: you know, life is like a great long race...

You know, writing a recursive descent parser is very much like making love to a beautiful woman... [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Toni

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#39

Post by keybored »

satvikpendem wrote: post #33
keybored wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The relevant comparison isn’t to people who think we are “more than physical structures”. It is to people who are a bit humbled by the complexity of the world and how when you seem to learn something new about it, ten more questions pop up. Which must be a forced attitude that some scientists have. Contrast that with the arrogance of creating a neural network in your garage and thinking to yourself: “well I guess as…

None of that relates to what I said though. Physicalists do continue to do research of the natural world, in fact, that is actually what drives them more toward physicalism! I think you are arguing a strawman, since no one said anything about being arrogant.

> None of that relates to what I said though. Physicalists do continue to do research of the natural world,

If they do research and this viewpoint works for them then who am I to judge.

I’m more used to this viewpoint being presented when someone who doesn’t work in some area expresses some opinion (hot take) on it. That could be a physicist expressing an opinion on cognitive science e.g. (whatever cognitive science is about).

> Physicalists do continue to do research of the natural world, in fact, that is actually what drives them more toward physicalism!

I don’t understand what physicalism is supposed to be about[1] beyond explicitly denying God-of-the-gaps.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsLOVYTLt90

> I think you are arguing a strawman, since no one said anything about being arrogant.

Just like no one identified themselves as being arrogant because they believe that they are more than physical structures. Or even claimed that they believe that they are more than physical structures. (The reductionists will often barge in an identify anyone who disagrees with their opinion as someone who believes in the supra-physical, based on nothing.)

Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)

#40

Post by bloopernova »

wizerno wrote: post #5

This is so important and underrated in life. > "This is what I infer when I see someone who is comfortable in their unique strangeness, too. There probably exists someone who enabled that evolution of personality. A parent, a friend group, a spouse. It is rare for people to come into themselves if no one is excited and curious about their core, their potential. We need someone who gives us space to unfold."

After a divorce, I met my soulmate. We're both weird and silly together, and together we discovered that we're both people with autism.

We've stopped masking around each other, and we both support each other's growth in self understanding.

The passage quoted in the parent comment really resonated with us both. We both know we're incredibly lucky and privileged to have found each other.

Post reply on HN