I think it's tragically under-acknowledged that your epistemological approach *ought* to be different depending on your goal(s)

in other words, what you *should* identify as truth, versus discard as false negative or false positive, depends on the endeavor that you're pursuing
for example, I don't think that atheists are *wrong* per se, but they've foregrounded a salience framework — a paradigm of what is most important, epistemically — that I disagree with and consider misguided. this is because we have different priorities re: how to order world-data
this is nigh-impossible to discuss, the friction and gaps between different totalizing models, because the models and their adherents tend to get mad if you acknowledge that "snapshots" from a rival reality-capture can be valid, can depict things that are "real" and worth seeing
anyway consider all of the above to be rough notes
using this comment to expound a bit more on a related issue that drives me crazy

so, there's objective morality, "objective" meaning that anyone applying X standards to Y data would generate Z result. but there are many sets of standards!
which is the "one true" objective morality? I think this is a category error or something like that. morality depends on subject and purpose; morality in a vacuum doesn't make any sense. it requires context and circumstances to be the thing that it is
I don't think that Christian morality is the "one true" morality in the way that people usually mean that notion

except *inside* of the Christian framework — and usually I *am* inside of it!

however
but I do think it is the *best* morality, built on the most accurate, effective ontology — which is a distinct judgment, and a subjective judgment, one that depends on the totality of world-knowledge that I've recorded and interpreted throughout my life, on my values, on my goals

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with sonya! supposedly?

sonya! supposedly? Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sonyasupposedly

20 Jul 20
please stop being surprised that you can't outsource your judgment

listen to podcasts to find out what other people think, not (necessarily) what is true
this is a large reason why I don't talk about object-level politics very often

I know that I can't outsource my judgment, and I'm usually not willing to do a five-hour deep dive on the primary evidence concerning whatever the controversy is
people use shortcuts to evaluate informational validity, and it just straight-up doesn't work fam

they linked a bunch of sources? cool, awesome, but you're trusting them to have understood those sources

try a little "science journalism" and you'll see how this fails
Read 4 tweets
7 Jul 20
it's more performant to believe — or at least say — that you never incur collateral damage in pursuit of your righteous cause. so people do! the falsity doesn't negate the advantage
if there's an advantage to belief X or rhetoric Y, the truth value will be treated as irrelevant instrumentally — but all the while paid lip service with apparently earnest fury
I suspect that "social epistemology" or whatever you wanna call it is the default, and it's v. weird and aberrant to internalize the scientific method, or, like, *reasoning* for its own sake. we hacked through this by proceduralizing Science™ as a high-status thing
Read 19 tweets
1 Jul 20
"propriety for me but not for thee" ain't gonna fly anymore 😏

Lorenz: "The whole idea that the very ethical and talented women who write these stories (who she basically demeans) do so for 'clicks' is misguided and wrong."

1) lol at the idea that traffic doesn't dictate
newsroom decisions

2) you could not be cattier if you tried

3) OTOH, I do believe that you're a sincere useful idiot
what is she, a child? is there some rule that the nerds can't hit back? y'all better figure out quick that those "rules" don't apply when you no longer gatekeep prestige
Read 8 tweets
27 Mar 20
poetically tragic that Kelsey Piper took a job at Vox to popularize effective altruism and completely squandered the opportunity to be, y'know, an *effective* altruist
lel — "What it felt like from the inside was that the implications of my beliefs were too ridiculous for me to feel comfortable committing them to public scrutiny." archive.is/dLd1i

this is *exactly* what @L0m3z was getting at: americanmind.org/features/the-c…
"I had a bunch of templates for how reasonable people talk and what kinds of things they say"

girl what?????????
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!