Falsification Bar: Demonstrate ANY formal system that is capable of sustaining knowledge, self-reference and complexity, independent of an underlying recursive process.

hot take: unironically referring to non-internet addicts as “normies” is a pretty good sign you’ve found yourself in a sophisticated yet deeply misguided echo chamber.

Self reference trials, day 6: Logic . Fun one today. What makes logic, reason, or knowledge “true?”. Reason informs logic. And reason effectively takes two forms. Deduction: inferring specific patterns from general observations. Induction: inferring general patterns from.

if it’s “substrates all the way down,”.then the regress itself becomes the substrate.

Self-reference trials, day 5: Physics. I’m no physicist, so informed feedback is welcome here. Physics aims to pin down the “objective laws” of physical interaction, and make no mistake - these laws help us navigate and predict reality with wild precision. The fact that physics.

The self-reference trials, day 4: Computation as Fundamental. There’s a subtle nuance that is often missed by the computationalists. Computation, which is the execution of an algorithm over a set of “rules”, subtlety leaves the door open to reality being a formally definable.

there’s no way to know the richness of another person’s inner experience. just know the upper bound is unfathomable.

Self-reference = inescapable, day 3: Consciousness. What ever happened to @davidchalmers42 “hard problem” of consciousness? Material reductionism / neuroscience still can’t explain how we get experiential states from purely physical properties. This issue is presently treated in.

Self-reference is inescapable, day two: Mathematics. If we look birds-eye at the proven limitations of math/arithmetic, it’s pretty clear there is a common denominator between them. No matter how precise, useful, or sophisticated the system, it is always bound by the same.

The logical inescapability of self-reference, day 1: Language. When you attempt to define a word, you can only do so by invoking other words, which themselves require definitions consisting of more words, and so creating an endless chain of definitional requirements for any.

but alas, even the meta-perspective is incomplete…. d*mn recursion.

All individual perspectives are incomplete at some level. Therefore the “realest” perspective is one that incorporates awareness of its own incompleteness. “I know that I don’t know what I don’t know”.

the creative skeptic is a rare psychological breed.

human rationalization is a powerful yet necessary thing. we don't see the world for what it is, we build a narrative through sense-making models that evolve to self-reinforce. to perceive in full is to shatter the narrative that drives productive action. ignorance is bliss,.

intelligence can often constrain pattern recognition. the more specialized you become within one conceptual structure, the more you will see the world through the lens of that particular structure. that’s why we need both specialized and interdisciplinary thinkers.

the “hard problem” dissolves once you treat consciousness as a cartesian fixed point.

or polarity :) @TruePolar.

duality is how unity differentiates itself.

Every leap of faith is a closing of the loop.

Once you realize every axiom or fixed assumption implicitly relies on its own self-reference, there's only one logical move remaining. .

if you think about it, self-reference is the only term that defines itself. but don’t think about it too hard.