Shadow Rebbe

This sound like you?

@DefenderOfBasic @experilearning as an aside, i did a spaced learning deck for a little, and the best parts were about remembering questions that I didn't know the answer to I'm not sure how idiosyncratic success that is

@DefenderOfBasic @experilearning great post interesting ideas the only way this will work is if you add another metecognitive layer to the AI, where it goes back and finds out what questions it could have asked to create the new ideas before it new they were valuable, and refine those many times imo

when lawyers tell me to NOT speak about something publicly, I test my ability to speak about it as loudly as I can until I get into trouble. This is how we test the "pipes" of our information networks

@NhavsMaimonides he didnt wanna be myth, he wanted to be science

@Shadow_Rebbe How else can mythology be taken?

Poor Freud, started as a doctor and ended as canonical text of endless interpretations, all detached from reality.

@NhavsMaimonides I think he's taken as scripture, almost biblically, in the palces where his name is sacred

@Shadow_Rebbe Started as a mythopoeist and ended as a mythopoeist

@ZevLowy I liked that podcast. I think straussian can often fail in this

“Strauss’s approach is to look at the context of an argument rather than to take it out of its context. To take it out of its context means to deprive it of the story that it represents. Analytic philosophy takes arguments out of their context and arranges them in an array. It then tries to compare those abstracted arguments. Strauss doesn’t try to abstract, but he looks to the context. The context is always something doubtful. Every Platonic dialogue leaves something out. The Republic, for example, doesn’t tell you about what people love instead of how people defend things. Since that’s the case, every argument in such a dialogue is intentionally a bad argument. It’s meant for a particular person, and it’s set to him. The analytic philosopher doesn’t understand that arguments, especially in a Platonic dialogue, can deliberately be inferior. It easily or too easily refutes the argument which you are supposed to take out of a Platonic dialogue and understand for yourself.” Mansfield

You can know the minutiae of textual corruption of Plato's dialogues and still not know anything about whether its better to be harmed or harm unjustly

@DefenderOfBasic careful, do this skillfully

all I've ever wanted to do was tell you all, all of you, everything on my mind. There are a lot of evil people in my mind. I do not wish to hurt them. But I cannot protect them. The only way I cannot protect them is by silencing & killing myself. I will do this no longer

>Go into a room of teachers >They are all talking about teaching kids >I ask if the kids have learned >They all laugh >"We teach" >But what about learning? >"You must be new here. We teach!" >I leave crying for the children

They can do calculus, but they don't even know that a fraction and division are the same thing. This is the education you are maxxing. It's called schooling.

I naturally am suspicious of my own tribe, but zooming out, its hard to imagine the guys who shoot their own citizens and shut down their own internet being the good guys It's not black and white ofc, but still... if there is a baddy here, aren't these tells a big deal?

peter principle

@ZoharAtkins @flowidealism but one should be able to defend that some things are legitamately axiomatic and therefore not defensible problem solved

@flowidealism I resonate deeply with the distinction. That said, some things just aren't defensible and that's also fine, provided you acknowledge that it's axiomatic. As Strauss might say, Revelation cannot be refuted by Reason.

There is a difference between intellectual and academic, and the distinction matters. At St. John's College, there were no tests. But you did not want to say something stupid in the seminar. The standard was not a grade. The standard was whether your claim could survive scrutiny from a room full of people who were paying close attention. That is the kind of standard I hold my students to. Everything we say in a Socratic discussion should be defensible on the basis of reason and evidence. If someone challenges your claim and you have nothing to support it, that is embarrassing. Not because you received a bad grade, but because you said something you could not defend.

I love so much. it makes me so vulnerable. but fuck it i want to love MORE and even HARDER the pain is WORTH IT

@TylerAlterman yes, often in a grocery listening to music and dancing as I do my stuff people smile, sometimes ask me what I'm listening to

On days when I’m auramaxxing, strange things happen. Homeless people randomly talk to me, babies gape, giant dudes will hold eye contact and nod (almost always non-white guys). I used to see this happen to my dad but I only started experiencing it off and on from maybe age 18. I imagine it’s what it feels like to be a hot girl lol. There are things that turn it on pretty reliably: watching exceptional films, going to a dance event, prayer, powerwalking to my powerwalk playlist, and getting really good news, but sometimes it happens randomly. I can rarely will it. Anyone else have this experience? What’s it like for you?

I think of myself as analagous to @chrislakin, only instead of coaching, general education and cultivation of human excellence

@TylerAlterman thats why substack says heres a poem and then there isn't

I vibecoded an "omniposter" Chrome extension so now I have the joy of seeing my weird-ass tweets popping up on LinkedIn

@TylerAlterman even the clown is going to be a lecture about why comedy is a good way to fight the patriarchy

@TylerAlterman this conference strikes me as one that looks really fun, but is actually deathly boring

Unfortunately I need to cut this section from my novel in which the protagonist sees that his mom is headlining a psychic leftist conference