Comments on: The Great Wiki http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/ Just another geek in the geek kingdom Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:38:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: The Profession of Faith of the Savoyard Blogger http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-13650 The Profession of Faith of the Savoyard Blogger Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:46:35 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-13650 [...] I’m like. I claim only the virtue of knowing what I am, and that I have only intermittently. Closer is this: I was recently talking to a friend about the rather open-ended recovery/12-step concept of [...] [...] I’m like. I claim only the virtue of knowing what I am, and that I have only intermittently. Closer is this: I was recently talking to a friend about the rather open-ended recovery/12-step concept of [...]

]]> By: I enjoy debating… | Sick Transit http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-12421 I enjoy debating… | Sick Transit Sat, 02 Oct 2010 19:10:37 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-12421 [...] enjoy debating… Posted on August 19, 2009 by danielglick …but Julian Sanchez defends it more eloquently than I ever could. This entry was posted in Abstractions. Bookmark the permalink. ← [...] [...] enjoy debating… Posted on August 19, 2009 by danielglick …but Julian Sanchez defends it more eloquently than I ever could. This entry was posted in Abstractions. Bookmark the permalink. ← [...]

]]> By: Intellectual Honesty http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-12287 Intellectual Honesty Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:51:52 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-12287 [...] So “intellectual honesty” is, in a sense, a higher standard than mere honesty.  And while dishonesty in argument is pretty much always a bad thing—you can imagine extreme “murderer at the door” counterexamples, of course—it’s not clear that “intellectual honesty” is necessary in every context. Sometimes—as in a debate round or an adversarial legal proceeding—you want everyone to make the strongest case they can for whatever position they’re assigned to defend, regardless of their own view, to get a clear contrast—or “good clash,” as we used to call it. Sometimes the point is working consensus rather than a search for some ideal.  If I make the case for school vouchers to a religious audience and point out how it would allow them greater freedom to have their kids educated in their own traditions, this might be “intellectually dishonest” in some sense: I think the religious indoctrination of children is a bad thing! And I’d be pretty queasy if the result of a voucher system were a dramatic increase in the number of schools treating “intelligent design” as a serious scientific theory.  I would be giving reasons why they should want to support a policy that I favor for mostly distinct reasons, not sincerely advancing what I think to be the best arguments—and that’s OK sometimes! It’s also a matter of degree rather than kind: I know many people who are at least as smart as I am disagree strongly with lots of my views, so I’m acutely aware that I could be wrong, and that it’s highly probable I’m mistaken about many things.  But instead of constantly hedging and qualifying—though I do plenty of that—I plunge ahead and trust that everything will work out in the Great Wiki. [...] [...] So “intellectual honesty” is, in a sense, a higher standard than mere honesty.  And while dishonesty in argument is pretty much always a bad thing—you can imagine extreme “murderer at the door” counterexamples, of course—it’s not clear that “intellectual honesty” is necessary in every context. Sometimes—as in a debate round or an adversarial legal proceeding—you want everyone to make the strongest case they can for whatever position they’re assigned to defend, regardless of their own view, to get a clear contrast—or “good clash,” as we used to call it. Sometimes the point is working consensus rather than a search for some ideal.  If I make the case for school vouchers to a religious audience and point out how it would allow them greater freedom to have their kids educated in their own traditions, this might be “intellectually dishonest” in some sense: I think the religious indoctrination of children is a bad thing! And I’d be pretty queasy if the result of a voucher system were a dramatic increase in the number of schools treating “intelligent design” as a serious scientific theory.  I would be giving reasons why they should want to support a policy that I favor for mostly distinct reasons, not sincerely advancing what I think to be the best arguments—and that’s OK sometimes! It’s also a matter of degree rather than kind: I know many people who are at least as smart as I am disagree strongly with lots of my views, so I’m acutely aware that I could be wrong, and that it’s highly probable I’m mistaken about many things.  But instead of constantly hedging and qualifying—though I do plenty of that—I plunge ahead and trust that everything will work out in the Great Wiki. [...]

]]> By: Nozick on Intellectual Humility http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-10908 Nozick on Intellectual Humility Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:21:57 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-10908 [...] to Anarchy State and Utopia. I think it captures my sense of human intellectual inquiry as (what I’ve elsewhere called) The Great Wiki: [The usual manner of presenting philosophical work puzzles me.  Works of [...] [...] to Anarchy State and Utopia. I think it captures my sense of human intellectual inquiry as (what I’ve elsewhere called) The Great Wiki: [The usual manner of presenting philosophical work puzzles me.  Works of [...]

]]> By: ThapsCams http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-9531 ThapsCams Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:50:52 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-9531 Best choice of the month: Cumshot, Longest cumshot, Cumshot video and Cumshot clips here http://cumshot.goodnano-av.com/ Best choice of the month: Cumshot, Longest cumshot, Cumshot video and Cumshot clips here http://cumshot.goodnano-av.com/

]]> By: sam http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-9012 sam Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:12:45 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-9012 "You mean, they put their hands in the laws of physics and the aerodynamics of a plane that is, in most cases, designed to naturally return to straight flight?" Well, recall that these were test pilots flying a machine for which is it was not at all clear that it <i>would</i> return to straight flight--hence, the testing. :) “You mean, they put their hands in the laws of physics and the aerodynamics of a plane that is, in most cases, designed to naturally return to straight flight?”

Well, recall that these were test pilots flying a machine for which is it was not at all clear that it would return to straight flight–hence, the testing. :)

]]> By: jre http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-9007 jre Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:22:11 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-9007 My flight instructor used to say "This little airplane <em>wants to fly,</em> but you youngbloods just gotta grab her by the scruff of the neck and yank her this way and that way 'til she can't fly anymore." Then he'd pull back on the yoke and throw her into an accelerated stall to illustrate his point. Maybe the Great Wiki is like that: we will all trend toward a net[1] advance in consciousness so long as we don't indulge in revert wars and the like. [1] (both senses) My flight instructor used to say “This little airplane wants to fly, but you youngbloods just gotta grab her by the scruff of the neck and yank her this way and that way ’til she can’t fly anymore.” Then he’d pull back on the yoke and throw her into an accelerated stall to illustrate his point.

Maybe the Great Wiki is like that: we will all trend toward a net[1] advance in consciousness so long as we don’t indulge in revert wars and the like.

[1] (both senses)

]]> By: Mike http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-9006 Mike Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:17:39 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-9006 You mean, they put their hands in the laws of physics and the aerodynamics of a plane that is, in most cases, designed to naturally return to straight flight? :) I know in racing they teach you that over-correcting is generally the worst, and most natural, thing you can do. You mean, they put their hands in the laws of physics and the aerodynamics of a plane that is, in most cases, designed to naturally return to straight flight? :)

I know in racing they teach you that over-correcting is generally the worst, and most natural, thing you can do.

]]> By: sam http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-8991 sam Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:11:54 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-8991 No doubt. But in those situations I would, like the general in War Games, piss on a sparkplug if I thought it would help (though getting to a sparkplug in an out-of-control aircraft might present a problem :) ). No doubt. But in those situations I would, like the general in War Games, piss on a sparkplug if I thought it would help (though getting to a sparkplug in an out-of-control aircraft might present a problem :) ).

]]> By: the teeth http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/08/19/the-great-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-8989 the teeth Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:22:41 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=3536#comment-8989 <em>They said it worked more often than you'd think.</em> A touch of survivorship bias going on here, maybe? :) They said it worked more often than you’d think.

A touch of survivorship bias going on here, maybe? :)

]]>