Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
I have heard theories along those lines, albeit more of an accidental nature (foreign bodies carrying "seeds" crashing into earth).
Now, as a theory of the origin of life, that just kicks the can down the road, of course.
It appears Michigan is locking down again. So is Austria. I'm sure other countries are, too.
What does it tell you about govt, "checks and balances," etc, when govt has enough power to close businesses and restrict movement? Should anyone have that kind of power?
@AxcidentalTweet @SpaceX
Depends, how attractive are we talking, and is the alien clean?
Once it's in the air, the bright part looks a bit like a sperm, with its oscillating tail and big head.
Since one day this technology will bring humans to other planets, perhaps we are literally going to inseminate those planets with new life.
Creativity—the true of source of most of a mind's knowledge, imo, including perception and language processing—seems completely underrated and underrepresented in the field.
There seems to be little to no mention of how the mind creates those algorithms in the first place. It seems to be assumed that the mind inherits them (evo psych), or that information processing causes a physical maturing of the brain which endows the mind with abilities.
Spoke to a cognitive scientist the other day. From that conversation, CogSci seems to be a lot about studying algorithms that are present in a mind, such as perception and language processing, and about how they store and process information in the brain.
@SpaceX @Astro_illini @AstroVicGlover @NASA @JAXA_en
Those suits look so cool.
Didn’t read the whole thing, but it sounds like farmers are legally barred from shooting crows that are attacking their lambs. Seems to me that law should be repealed.
RT @ClimateWarrior7:
Climate lockdowns! Yesss!
Also the population should be reduced via mandatory queering.
RT @ClimateWarrior7:
White women are a problem that just doesn't go away.
I believe the solution lies in mandatory arranged marriages with…
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Onne is here to reinforce his notion of children as "barbarians" who need to be coerced. Of course, Onne could easily prove me wrong by presenting an argument that would change his mind about children.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
If the claim had instead been that of regularly dragging adults around and putting them in timeouts, or other people's children, I assume that would have been a lot more worrisome to some. That tells us something about society's image of what is okay for parents to do.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
It also speaks volumes that Onne's actions were defended by claiming, in effect, that they're (in reality only somewhat) socially acceptable and therefore they're morally acceptable. They're not.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
I think it speaks volumes that the guy who calls him out clearly and directly for this (again, open to being wrong) pays much more social penalty than the guy who openly despises and advocates violence against children.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
He's made it very clear that he hates children. He has called them "insane" and "ignorant barbarians," said dealing with them requires force.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
I am unclear about Onne's motivation in this discussion, however. Several points of his have been refuted, but then he dodges and shifts the conversation to something else. I don't think he has refuted anything I originally wrote, which would have been good.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
If by "the only means of stopping it" you mean discussion, it doesn't seem to have been ruined, because Onne continues to discuss, which is great. To be clear, I am open to the idea that my approach is wrong.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @ks445599 @onnlucky
What I was trying to say is that expecting good-faith discussion while at the same time engaging in name calling is rather hypocritical. You seem to be defending that attitude.
Please submit your comments by successively commenting on each of your subcomments—not by submitting every comment to the original tweet. Much easier to read that way.
Have you refuted refutations of Lamarckism?
Tolles Bild. GsD ist der Wahnsinn vorbei.
How would you pay for these things? How would you take bad actors into account?
Unclear, intimidating language makes it harder to receive criticism and, therefore, to improve.
"An international group of lawyers is preparing a lawsuit against the World Health Organization for “crimes against humanity” over the draconian COVID-19 lockdowns worldwide."
Good. Crimes against humanity have consequences.
(I said "government" but you can substitute that with "school" and the argument works the same.)
The "trick" is to identify the vital functions it has taken over, and leave those at first, while replacing the non-vital functions pretty quickly.
Then you can start replacing the vital functions slowly. The parasite will resist along the way, but it should be possible somehow.
I am a gradualist, too. I don't know yet what I'd want to change first. I have likened government to a parasite that has infested its host to a degree that is has taken over vital functions. Ripping out the parasite all at once would kill the host.
Musk isn't right about everything. But he's said a lot of good things about the virus and lockdowns.
By the way, these are my views only, not necessarily those of TCS. I’m only speaking for myself here.
It's inside the embedded tweet.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
You are still misrepresenting my claim.
What I was really getting at is that actions by others (e. g. child abuse) should be judged independently of whether they're socially sanctioned. Child abuse is abhorrent even if >90% of people think it's okay.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
Acknowledged. And yes, the real irony in all this is that I'm being doubly, triply called out, which all serves to defend the child abuser...
@DoqxaScott @tjaulow @ks445599 @onnlucky
There is no point in discussing with somebody who admits to discussing for the purpose of laying into you but expects good faith in return.
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
I don't understand this tweet. Can you rephrase please?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
You condemned cancel culture (correctly, imo). You say limiting to calling out would have been fine. Two sentences later you effectively claim equivalence of calling out and cancel culture (that's what I take "no better" to mean).
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
In other words, what you call out is based on cultural sanction, not moral explanations of what you know to be right and wrong?
@DoqxaScott @tjaulow @ks445599 @onnlucky
Martin liked your "hit" comment. I'm afraid I don't believe anymore that you two are looking to have an ongoing argument in good faith. Is your main intent to lay into the guy who broke a social convention?
@DoqxaScott @tjaulow @ks445599 @onnlucky
You wrote that my calling out Onne was "not conducive to ongoing argument in good faith." twitter.com/DoqxaScott/sta…
Now you refer to it as a "hit"—an inside joke with Martin, of sorts, at my expense.
There was also twitter.com/DoqxaScott/sta…
How is any of this conducive?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
Before we get to the video: "I have a pretty clear image" meaning you know the contradiction in your previous tweet? If so, what is it?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
Your criticism makes sense—convincing Onne that it is abuse is important.
I'm curious how you would answer the questions in my previous tweet?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
Your comment is self-contradictory. Do you know what I'm referring to?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
I never said I reported him, no. Read what I wrote carefully.
What bearing does the fact that this "practice" is recommended by parenting authorities have on the morals of the situation?
Why does the guy who points out the abuse receive more criticism than the perpetrator?
@DoqxaScott @tjaulow @onnlucky @ks445599
I understand. But hear me out, please: Somebody publicly admits to abusing his child, then somebody else clearly and directly calls him out.
Nobody criticizes the abuser in response, everyone lays into the other guy. Which is worse? And whom are social conventions protecting?
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
I continue to discuss with you guys. I haven't discouraged you from discussing with Onne either...
see also twitter.com/dchackethal/st…
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky @ks445599
Cancel culture is when prominent figures lose their job over something they said. That's not what this is.
@DoqxaScott @onnlucky @tjaulow @ks445599
"Unprepared to argue for" I have argued quite a bit in this thread, no? And I continue to do so:
Nobody has offered a refutation of my views yet, yet I keep asking...
How can you quickly evaluate theories of the mind without having to read page after page of academic jargon?
Use these two handy razors: blog.dennishackethal.com/2020/11/14/two…
There is no irony here. A worldview that condemns the use of force against peaceful people (such as your child) is perfectly compatible with one that advocates the use of force against violent people (such as yourself).
You have mistaken libertarianism for pacifism.
Learned a lot from @NickHudsonCT of @PanData19 this episode. We cover what is known about the virus and the disastrous effects of bad political philosophy & lockdowns on people and businesses—and the surprisingly deep answer to whether masks work. 😷🦠🔬
@tjaulow @DoqxaScott @onnlucky
If so: for as long as they like.
It is those who abuse their children who disrupt their family, not those who report it.
They would. And they should. And they will, as much as possible.
That a crime is ubiquitous doesn't mean it's not a crime, or that it's okay. Nor does the infeasibility of investigating every crime mean one shouldn't investigate any particular crime.
@cm_richards @onnlucky @tjaulow
Timeouts are mental abuse. Their biggest effect is that it traumatizes the child.
@onnlucky @tjaulow
You just publicly admitted to abusing your son mentally and physically. Child abuse is a crime. You have been reported to the Dutch authorities and Twitter. Your tweet has been archived here: archive.vn/pDDpM#selectio…
I implore you to stop abusing your child immediately.
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
Don’t know what you mean by “tacit” knowledge.
It might be a mixture of both. Given how static and irrational memes around parenting are, I suspect they remain pretty much the same across many generations of people.
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
...and I think the effects of those memes are predictable, at least to an extent.
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
For example, one reason one cannot predict the content of future thoughts is because the growth of knowledge is unpredictable. That's a possible reason your claim might be true.
On the other hand, memes can cause reliable behaviors across many people...
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
I understand that. You have restated your claim. You didn't explain why it is true though—which is what I was really asking for.
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
Doesn't answer my question
@onnlucky @tjaulow
By "force," do you mean what it says here under "coercion": takingchildrenseriously.com/node/50#Coerci…
?
@TrainMoneyBrain @ks445599 @onnlucky
I didn't make a prediction about parents' feelings, only their thoughts. If you meant to claim that I can't possibly know the content of those thoughts: why not?
RT @dchackethal:
@eig
Agreed. It's an example of a parasitic institution that has infiltrated its host so uncompromisingly that it has take…
"getting what you want makes you evil" --> that is the altruist view of individuals succeeding in life.
The organism has to create the relevant knowledge first. In other words, school does provide something that is valuable and needs to be replaced adequately.
Agreed. It's an example of a parasitic institution that has infiltrated its host so uncompromisingly that it has taken over vital functions that a healthy organism could provide for itself. Ripping the parasite out would kill the organism—it has to be a gradual change.
Indeed. Ironically, I imagine many who initially warm up to these ideas then switch back once they become parents because dormant static memes are switch on in their minds. And then they'll think "they understand" and think that the static memes are true after all.
I organized these thoughts a bit more and added some detail here: blog.dennishackethal.com/2020/11/12/the…
@HeuristicAndy
Agreed, there is progress being made. Fingers crossed it continues that way.
Probably a lot of people are having children too who shouldn't be having them because they can't afford to give them the freedoms they need.
Re solving the problem that parents can't be home all day: dunno yet. But it strikes me as a soluble problem whose solution doesn't involve sticking children into coercive institutions.
E.g. parents could help coordinate daycare needs, pool money for babysitters, etc.
Children don't need school to create knowledge. Helping children learn is not what school is for. If we're worried about children not learning enough, it's best to avoid school.
Well, parents intentionally take things away from their kids, but yes, the intentions are mostly good. Agreed that accusatory tone doesn't help. I do think the greatest injustices are backed by good intentions though.
No, knowledge created when playing video games often reaches into the real world.
How would you feel if someone forcibly prevented you from pursuing the activities you enjoy?
More importantly, you're still focusing on what you think children need—not what they want.
And does practicality justify force? I think not.
If the problems children want to solve require reading/writing/match—and sooner or later they will—they will learn those things. There are plenty of resources online, they can get together with friends, seek help voluntarily from people who want to teach them, etc.
It is not true that playing video games "creates nothing." One has to continuously solve problems by creating knowledge as one plays.
What's an activity you enjoy?
I forgot to add something very important: she continues to say that Comte coined the term "to mean, specifically, the placing of the interests of others above your own." youtu.be/7RFlPmjUbRo?t=…
That's exactly what I had in mind with schools. School are altruism machines.
AGIs will be capable of having emotions like all other people—and I'm not sure emotions could be programmed into it. They're something an AGI will evolve in its mind by itself.
I think many experienced critical rationalists understand this deeply—but for me, it was a breakthrough. Though the topic is sad, writing this thread was fun. I’m pursuing my interests right now. I love critical rationalism.
It explains why so many expect their peers to sacrifice their happiness for the health of others by agreeing to house arrests. Why those who don't want their salaries to be cut in half by taxes are considered "evil." Why so many can't begin to imagine a world without coercion.
...quoting Auguste Comte. It explains why people live for other people, and then expect the next generation to do so as well. It’s what they were forced to do during the most formative years of their lives after all!
If school’s main purpose is to teach children how to neglect their own interests and pursue other people’s, that also explains where altruism comes from—the evil doctrine Rand so eloquently refuted and which, she says, “regards man, in effect, as a sacrificial animal”...
I’m thankful that David Deutsch places emphasis on fun and interests. They're hugely underrated.
Parents are often complicit in this. They take away things that their children enjoy, e.g. computer games, or at least put time limits on them—so their kids spend less time doing what they want and more of what they allegedly need, which is determined by anyone but the child.
It is there that they learn that their interests have no chance of leading to anything fruitful, and quickly shut them down.
It is only after 12 years of mind-numbing boredom and neglecting one’s preferences that people voluntarily spend the next 30 years at jobs they hate. It is in school that they learn how to live with problems instead of solving them.
I recently asked a 14 year old close to me if she’d like to go to college. She said no, but that she probably will anyway because she thinks she should. It’s heartbreaking.
One must learn to coerce oneself into neglecting one’s preferences. I think that is what school is really for: not just to standardize children, but to break them, too, to get them to place others’ interests over their own.
What can one possibly do in such a situation to stay sane? One must learn to put one’s interests on the back burner and prioritize other people’s interests—in this case, the teacher’s, and society’s at large.
So the child wants to learn about astronomy—but doesn’t get to. Instead, he is coerced to learn other things he isn’t interested in. Day in, day out, for some 12 years. As Popper said, he has to learn answers to questions he didn’t ask.
Consider a child who is interested in, say, astronomy. There are no elementary-school classes about astronomy. And even if there were, it is highly unlikely that every child will happen to be interested in everything shoved down his throat every year, at just the right time.