Comments on “The value of meaninglessness”

Comments

I'm convinced, finally, that Bayesianism is not enough

Kenny's picture

I finally get the point you’ve been making, for years now, and understand that it really was, for many of us, what you call a ‘rationalism’.

It’s still very useful! But it’s only useful when used reasonably and, meta-rationally, it may not be useful, or the most useful form of rationality, for some (or most!) possible circumstances.

(I just started this ‘book’ from the begining, ignoring your advice to wait until the later parts of the book have been published. I suspect that, given my extended exposure to your writing, I’ll be okay.)

Thanks again for all of this wonderful work!

Add new comment

Navigation

This page is in the section Part One: Taking rationalism seriously,
      which is in In the Cells of the Eggplant.

The next page in this section is The truth of the matter.

The previous page is Depends upon what the meaning of the word “is” is.

General explanation: Meaningness is a hypertext book. Start with an appetizer, or the table of contents. Its “metablog” includes additional essays, not part the book.

Subscribe to new content by email. Click on terms with dotted underlining to read a definition. The book is a work in progress; pages marked ⚒︎ are under construction.