That's the argument of Daniel Kahneman's Thinking fast and slow.

Isn’t this from the guy who wrote a whole book praising enlightenment values? Lol

Can you extend that to a machine? If you grant a machine the feeling of pain, of love and lose, can it become free?

Similarly, can I create a sub human with same intelligence as a gorilla and make it subservient?

It is true that Reddit's moderators have a great deal of power and control over what is allowed on the platform, and that their decisions are final. However, Reddit does seek to promote free speech. Reddit encourages users to express their opinions, opinions are generally respected and allowed to exist on the platform and Reddit actively works to combat censorship. While Reddit does have rules and moderators that enforce these rules, they seek to create an open, safe platform where users can freely express their opinions without fear of retaliation.

Irrationality is a great defense against people with good arguments and none of your best interest in mind.

Commitment and apologia riddled with lies and misrepresentations.

Interesting. Reminds me of the excellent Gerd Gigerenzer's Gut Feelings.

Precisely. I don’t think most “ ditzy girls” have intelligence in the academic sense (academics are far too egotistical) but I do think they’re incredibly socially intelligent

Yes. Our mind regularly occludes information in order to operate. It can become too cognitively taxing otherwise. And in a social world, sometimes trying to be more rational has zero payoff other than for your own pursuit of truth or whatever.

Basically saying what’s already known but I appreciate the different angle.

Or motives.

[removed]

[removed]

Professor Keith Stanovich’s metaphor of the “cognitive miser” made me appreciate how tiring it would be if someone wanted to be truly “rational” and “fully capable” at all times:

>…”we tend to be cognitive misers. When approaching a problem, we can choose from any of several cognitive mechanisms. Some mechanisms have great computational power, letting us solve many problems with great accuracy, but they are slow, require much concentration and can interfere with other cognitive tasks. Others are comparatively low in computational power, but they are fast, require little concentration and do not interfere with other ongoing cognition. Humans are cognitive misers because our basic tendency is to default to the processing mechanisms that require less computational effort, even when they are less accurate.” > >—Source, ‘Scientific American — Rational & Irrational Thought’ by Keith Stanovich

Edit: others have mentioned that this idea is basically the core argument of Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking Fast & Slow”, but just an FYI Stanovich’s metaphor pre-dates Kahneman’s book , and in that book Kahneman openly says he took some of Stanovich’s terms & was “greatly influenced” by Stanovich’s early writings. Kahneman didn’t steal in some secretive way though, he has given Stanovich a lot of credit & speaks about him as a pioneer.

Thank you for the reference.

I will have look.

We see it constantly with reality shows. That kind of performative stupidity can be very useful at concealing someone’s true abilities

Explains his commitment to optimism in the face of a social order that seeks to undermine it's ecological survival

I was ignorantly incapacitated which caused my irrationality 🫠

It’s interesting when you try to apply this to Reddit. In Reddit what you are allowed to say is completely subject to the whims and moods of whichever moderator is reading your post. The moderator is anonymous and their decisions are absolute, final, and not subject to any kind of process before or after the action is taken. They are also completely hidden from the public.

It’s basically censorship by a dictator.

Despite this Reddit sells itself as a free speech platform.

The irony of reading this on Reddit

You can objectively point out at so many things which you could label as "it makes me sad!". But you cannot objectively name one thing that makes you happy in absolutenees.

Is reality 100% deterministic? Determinism says everything has a cause, so the beginning must be uncaused, right? With this reasoning, indeterminism must be true in some aspects of reality.

That's too bad, but I guess it's the price of keeping our computers safe!

Well put. It’s nice to have a place to practice philosophy (to some extent) as opposed to just telling someone what views are out there.

You're welcome. I'm curious how you imagine the history of dictionaries, though, if you think negatively of what I've said about them.

I suppose you don’t consider doing the dishes a real accomplishment? I guess I have lowered my expectations with age.