Read on Twitter
1/ Infant idea; not sure if new:
Compositional atomism isn& #39;t true, but what I& #39;ll call "compilational" (in reference to computer science) atomism is true
But everything compiles down to "the Dao," descriptions of which are subject to Quine& #39;s interderminacy of translation
Compositional atomism isn& #39;t true, but what I& #39;ll call "compilational" (in reference to computer science) atomism is true
But everything compiles down to "the Dao," descriptions of which are subject to Quine& #39;s interderminacy of translation
2/ But no matter what, the world-narrations and meaning-making/sensemaking behaviors of any world-narrator are patterned (albeit conditionally, transiently, etc.).
I& #39;ll call the totality of all this for any subject the "Gesamtsprache" (total language).
I& #39;ll call the totality of all this for any subject the "Gesamtsprache" (total language).
3/ So the Gesamtsprache of any subject is changed by mechanisms like reward/punishment, assimilitation/accomodation.
It will tend towards equilibria. But because of indeterminacy of translation & subjective differences, there is not ONE equilibrium.
It will tend towards equilibria. But because of indeterminacy of translation & subjective differences, there is not ONE equilibrium.
4/ The actual equilibrium reached will also depend heavily on the *actual* reward/punishment events experienced.
One& #39;s Gesamptsprache does not adapt to "possible" stimuli that one is not *actually* exposed to (e.g. those that may affect some posited abstract/other subject).
One& #39;s Gesamptsprache does not adapt to "possible" stimuli that one is not *actually* exposed to (e.g. those that may affect some posited abstract/other subject).
5/ We can make pragmatic evaluations of Gesamtsprachen according to several criteria. e.g.:
current reward/punishment
vulnerability to potential reward/punishment
[^relatedly, scope of coverage]
parsimony (ease of use/access)
ease of communication w/ other Gesamtsprachen
current reward/punishment
vulnerability to potential reward/punishment
[^relatedly, scope of coverage]
parsimony (ease of use/access)
ease of communication w/ other Gesamtsprachen
6/ Good equilibrium Gesamptsprachen tend to have powerful "compilation algorithms" that make sense of as much as possible.
For example, the totality of "Western" academia is on a pretty good track w/ its various domains of self-improving science.
For example, the totality of "Western" academia is on a pretty good track w/ its various domains of self-improving science.
7/ However, to take a *particular* theoretical framework (especially a static one w/o criteria for self-modification) *as* the Gesamtsprache leads to high punishment. As in when it& #39;s wrong/unsuitable.
8/ But the actual totality of knowledge or whatever is VERY difficult (indeed impossible) for an individual human subject to grasp.
Also, ease of application is a real issue. It takes real effort to learn to do science well, for example. "STEM" is a decent GS, but *hard.*
Also, ease of application is a real issue. It takes real effort to learn to do science well, for example. "STEM" is a decent GS, but *hard.*
9/ Controversial thesis:
The 4/5-element system of many ancient cultures is actually a VERY decent base language for a Gesamtsprache to compile to, if you& #39;re not specifically trying to produce new technologies or anything.
In fact, most people should be taught ^ instead of STEM
The 4/5-element system of many ancient cultures is actually a VERY decent base language for a Gesamtsprache to compile to, if you& #39;re not specifically trying to produce new technologies or anything.
In fact, most people should be taught ^ instead of STEM
10/ The *actuality* of reward/punishment events is very important to consider. Education is not free.
One doesn& #39;t *need* "post-rationalism" to make decent sense of everyday life, for most lifestyles. To develop it is indeed a waste of limited resources.
One doesn& #39;t *need* "post-rationalism" to make decent sense of everyday life, for most lifestyles. To develop it is indeed a waste of limited resources.
11/ I especially think this because of the shitty deluded & literally wrong & bad corrupted misunderstanding of STEM/rationalism a LOT of people have today. It is actually *harmful*.
These people would probably be much better off if we weren& #39;t *trying* to teach them "STEM".
These people would probably be much better off if we weren& #39;t *trying* to teach them "STEM".
12/ I think a big part of the problem is that as even as total human knowledge rapidly grows, there& #39;s an implicit consensus belief that it& #39;s good to give every *individual* as close an approximation to the totality of human knowledge as possible.
I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS!!
I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS!!
13/ At least, the idea can be questioned. Other factors can be considered in determining who would really benefit from education towards one& #39;s understanding approximating total human understanding.
Some people won& #39;t. With these people, actively do something different.
Some people won& #39;t. With these people, actively do something different.
14/ I suggested the 4/5 elements system as a best-available "commoner& #39;s Gesamtsprache," if you will. But it could probably be improved by intentional design.
Social changes would also be necessary. The implementation would be a huge project. But again, just an infant idea.
Social changes would also be necessary. The implementation would be a huge project. But again, just an infant idea.
